Gitk maintainership, was Re: The health of gitk

> On Wed, Nov 13, 2024 at 08:41:42AM +0100, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> Hi Hannes,
>>
>> I would like to offer this thread as Exhibit A in support for the case I
>> started making at [GitMerge '24](https://git-merge.com/) to convince you
>> to consider maintaining gitk in addition to Git GUI.
>>
>> Having one maintainer of Git GUI and gitk would make for a quite natural
>> fit, I would think, as both are written in Tcl/Tk, neither is used by the
>> core Git contributors because they are GUI programs, both lower the bar
>> for new Git users because they are GUI programs, and either would be
>> subject for eviction from git/git unless maintained by an active
>> volunteer.
>>
>> From what I see, Git GUI is in real good hands since you took over, I see
>> reports and patches picked up quickly and the style of your replies is
>> refreshingly constructive and friendly.
>>
>> This morning, I woke up to find a new PR in microsoft/git
>> (https://github.com/microsoft/git/issues/704) that cherry-picks the patch
>> that was offered in this here mail list thread. That patch is almost four
>> years old, i.e. just about ready to enter pre-school and to learn how to
>> read and write. Yet apart from Beat's confirmation that it fixes a real
>> bug, this here patch has been treated with silence.
>>
>> Unfortunately, the original GitGitGadget PR had to be locked down and
>> therefore Tobias would not be able to send another iteration even if he
>> wanted to (which I doubt, given the experience on this mailing list).
>>
>> Therefore I see the need not only to revive this thread, but also to look
>> for an active gitk maintainer.
>>
>> May I ask you, now in public, whether you would be potentially open to
>> maintain gitk in addition to Git GUI? If so, I would then start a proper
>> new thread to nominate you officially.
> 
> If Hannes is willing to take this on, I would support that fully and I
> would also be happy to assist.  I know I was extremely slack about
> gitk patches for a long while, but I think I have a little more free
> time now, having retired.
> 
> There is another issue which will need to be sorted out, which is
> whether to persist with a separate tree that gets merged into the git
> repository, or just edit the copy of gitk in the git repository.
> There have been tree-wide patches applied to the git tree which
> affected gitk, meaning that my gitk repository is now out of sync.
> I recently (as in several weeks ago) sent Junio Hamano an email asking
> this question, and asking for his opinion on the best way to proceed
> with gitk patches, but got no reply.