Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add keyword unexpansion support to convert.c
- From
Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
- Date
- Apr 17, 2007, 20:29 UTC
- Message-ID
- <alpine.LFD.0.98.0704171624190.4504@xanadu.home>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.63.0704171244450.1696@qynat.qvtvafvgr.pbz>
On Tue, 17 Apr 2007, David Lang wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> On Tue, 17 Apr 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > > I cannot do otherwise than ask at this point in the debate: why isn't > > the makefile rule sufficient for your needs? Why going through a > > complicated path that no one else will support due to its numerous > > pitfalls? > > not all uses of VCS's involve useing make
Use perl then. Or a shell script. Or even a command.com batch script. Or your own tool.
Show 7 quoted lines
> > > That's just being obtuse - no other tool cares in the slightest about > > > the keywords, there are more "tools" in the world than just the VCS. > > > > ... which reinforces my question: why force a task on the VCS if it > > doesn't fit well with its fundamental design? > > becouse the VCS can do the job better then anything else?
On what basis?
> even if there are > limits to what the VCS can do.
In the context of keyword expansion I don't agree at all with this statement. Git can *not* do better than an external tool and it has been demonstrated a few times already.
Nicolas