Re: Should we discuss Windows-related changes on git@vger.kernel.org?

From: Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@zib.de>
Date: Jul 11, 2008, 15:51 UTC
Message-ID: <65365AC4-D7C9-462B-8239-F3B35F7ECBEF@zib.de>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0807111349470.3640@eeepc-johanness>

On Jul 11, 2008, at 1:56 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Steffen Prohaska wrote:
>
>> I decided to stop queuing changes in 4msysgit.  Instead I'd like to
>> bring the diff between Junio's and 4msysgit's master to zero.  This
>> seems to be achievable after Junio merged Hannes' MinGW changes.
>>
>> I think all Windows-related changes to the git code base could be
>> discussed directly on the main git list and the msysgit list would be
>> reserved for the MinGW/MSYS runtime environment and the installer.
>
> I disagree.  Judging from the mails I read on the git list, Junio gets
> really swamped by patches these days (what with our very productive  
> GSoC
> students).

Sending the patches to the git list does not necessarily mean that they are directly addressed to Junio. We discuss JGIT, EGIT, gitk, and git gui patches on the list too. AFAIK, none of them are applied by Junio directly but by the respective maintainers. We could handle Windows-related patches similarly.

Show 6 quoted lines

> I really think that we should discuss the patches on the msysGit list
> first, whip them into shape, and then send them off.
>
> Just think of those patches that were sent off, only to realize that  
> they
> were no longer needed.  That should not have happened.

I intentionally sent the patches to show and discuss the differences between the state of the MinGW port in Junio's master and in 4msysgit. Some of the patches could be reverted in 4msysgit. But, at least one patch was unrelated to MinGW and is now in master. Some other patches need more work and are currently improved. I think this was not a waste of time.

	Steffen