Re: Renaming "non-contrib" things out of contrib/* (was "Re: [Bug] git-credential-netrc.perl[...]")

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: May 25, 2021, 10:35 UTC
Message-ID: <60acd2f76e290_2257a208e9@natae.notmuch>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqtumrfgqx.fsf@gitster.g>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > I wonder if just a top-level completion/* wouldn't be best, or if we
> > want to group them all together something like
> > optional/{completion,credential}/ or other name suggesting that these
> > are meant to interact with not-always-present 3rd party software. Maybe
> > integrations/* ?
> 
> Add-ons?

An add-on extends the functionality of the core. These are not add-ons.

Show 5 quoted lines

> I think dispelling the conception by distro people must begin with
> an update to contrib/README where it clearly says these are
> "contributed software" that are not part of "Git".  They are not
> something we stand behind like what we have in the rest of the
> source tree.

They know what the README says.

But they also know what the README says is not true. git-completion.bash is completely fine for wide-spread use, and in fact, it's already used widely. They are not going to remove `/usr/share/bash-completion/completions/git` just because upstream developers write something innacurate in contrib/README.

Their first responsibility is to provide the most usable system they can to their users. git completions for bash is essential towards that goal.

As long as the README contains innacurate information they will be forced to ignore it, and keep installing valuable stuff from contrib/ at their own discretion.

> We instead encourage them to write and sell their ware on their own
> merit alone, without planning to "borrow" authority and gain undue
> advantage over its competitors by being in the contrib/ area in our
> tree.

They why did you reject my git-related tool[1], and yet accepted a direct competitor git-contacts[2]? It certainly looks like you have undue advantage to one tool over the other.

There's is also hg-to-git, a competition of git-remote-hg.

And for that matter git-completion.zsh, a tool I created, and is now in competition with git-completion[3].

It would be nice if what was stated above was true, but alas it's not.

Cheers.

[1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/CAMP44s2+rNG+VPVJ82UsfrmHugnUwBVJfYF5QRVn0=JC061RFg@mail.gmail.com/ [2] https://lore.kernel.org/git/7vobamgqqh.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org/ [3] https://github.com/felipec/git-completion

-- 
Felipe Contreras