From: Felipe Contreras Date: Thu, 28 Aug 2008 00:09:08 GMT Subject: Re: [kernel.org users] [RFD] On deprecating "git-foo" for builtins Message-ID: <94a0d4530808271709s4e96c5a7ie6152b2937f2234b@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <7v63pmkozh.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 2:38 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Matthew Wilcox writes: > >> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 01:39:30PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> When I hear something like what David Woodhouse said in this thread, I >>> should be feeling "People -- those of you who claimed to be the silent >>> majority -- see, I told you so! This is a very bad move". >>> >>> But I can't. People who complain _now_ just annoy me even more. Why >>> weren't you defending the backward compatibility with me, which you seem >>> to value it so much, perhaps even more than I did back then? Why are you >>> wasting our time bringing it up again, instead of joining the discussion >>> when it _mattered_ back then? >> >> We didn't know the conversation was going on. Why should we? We only >> use the tool, not develop it. I'm also not on the mailing lists for >> mutt, vim, gcc, binutils, openssh, grep, xchat, mozilla, gnome, xpdf or >> any of the dozens of other programs I use on a daily basis. > > Oh, I wasn't talking to you, or "we as git users". The user side of the > discussion has long been over in another thread titled "[kernel.org users] > README and ChangeLog files" that was started by HPA, and everybody now > knows that the conclusion of the discussion was that 1.6.0 transition was > underadvertised to the end-user community and caused pain. Sorry about > that, but let's leave it behind. What has happend has happened. > > The discussion in this thread was about how to go forward from here, now > the transition is over. One of the future directions the transition was > aiming at was removal of git-foo form for built-ins even from the libexec > area -- I was complaining about David's beating an offtopic dead horse in > the above, because it was throwing the thread in an off-track direction, > distracting everybody from discussing what was more important, discussing > constructively if/how to proceed from here. > > Now the primary topic of what to do about built-ins have already settled. > We _will_ keep git-foo commands in the libexec area. We won't be removing > them. > > So there is no need to worry. Still, if this is the decision, all the documentation should be updated, and people should be discouraged to mention the git-foo commands ever again, otherwise new users would get confused. -- Felipe Contreras