From: Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 20:29:49 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Add keyword unexpansion support to convert.c
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:

> 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.

> > > 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