Re: What's in git.git

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Oct 26, 2006, 09:24 UTC
Message-ID: <7v7iynpgza.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <ehpu4t$ch2$1@sea.gmane.org>

Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes:

Show 12 quoted lines

> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>>   I've flushed all the 'gitweb/' changes from "next" and core
>>   support that some of them needed; notably "for-each-ref" and
>>   "blame --porcelain" is now in "master".  Oh, and "annotate"
>>   is now a mere synonym for "blame -c".
>>       gitweb: prepare for repositories with packed refs.
>>       gitweb: use for-each-ref to show the latest activity across branches
>
> This unfortunately means that I cannot test gitweb based on 'master'
> branch using _released_ git core, git version 1.4.3.3, as it doesn't have
> git-for-each-ref nor git-show-ref.

As long as "master" version of gitweb goes with "master" version of the core, I do not see it as a problem. Otherwise how would you make any progress?

> ... Should
> we try to wait for core feature to mature to released version before using
> it in gitweb?

That's both insulting and inconsistent.

Insulting in that somehow you seem to feel "master" is lessor quality than "maint", and inconsistent in that you seem to find "gitweb" is somehow more special than other scripts we ship as part of the git.git project sources.

Anyhow, I have done my fair share of git hacking for the week, so I'll stop venting and go to bed.