Re: [PATCH 00/13] remote-hg: general updates

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Apr 7, 2013, 03:32 UTC
Message-ID: <7vy5cv818k.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <CAMP44s1t=cTQiOoXdbdEKa3zLa+8pi+BUU1n1XOzo+-LqGHs2Q@mail.gmail.com>

Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:

Show 11 quoted lines

> On Fri, Apr 5, 2013 at 7:28 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>
>> A tool that is in contrib/ follows the contrib/README rule.
>>
>> I do not maintain it. Maintenance is up to the person who asked to
>> include it there.  I do ask the people who propose to add something
>> in contrib/ to promise that they arrange it to be maintained.
>
> That's true, but I meant that you are the gatekeeper. Ultimately you
> decide which patches go in. If Max, or anybody else, wants a patch
> into contrib, you can get it in, even if I disagree with it.

In an ideal fantasy world, it could be true, but when I say "I do not maintain it, and people who put it in contrib/ is responsible for it", I really mean it.

I may find the behaviour/performance of the sub-maintainer of a part in contrib/ unsatisfactory and have to take an administrative action (e.g. to remove the problematic part out of contrib/), but I would rather not to do that kind of thing, if possible. Instead I expect people who have any code in my tree (even in contrib/) to act as a responsible adult, taking and responding to constructive criticisms well, and more importantly, nudging those whose utterance you find are mostly noise into raising a more concrete and actionable issues that would be useful to you as an input.

> Either way, I think if things go well, remote-hg will prove it's worth
> and move out of contrib and into git's core.

That was what you promised when we started carrying it in contrib/; I am still hoping to see it happen when it matures.