Re: Git in GSoC 2025

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jan 30, 2025, 21:00 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqr04kaufo.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqjzaccdpn.fsf@gitster.g>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

> I do not mind either word, either, but I have two small issues to
> raise:
>
>  - Is each topic "owned" by some specific person?  Would an owner
>    retires from the project, would the leftover bits go away with
>    the owner?

I obviously meant "When an owner retires", but more importantly, I should have offered an alternative here, instead of just raising it as an issue.

How about making the rule a lot simpler?

    The expiration date kicks in _mechanically_, i.e. stale entries
    are unconditionally dropped at the date, based solely on the
    comparison between the timestamp and the wall clock.

People are free to advocate for its continued existence, and when such an effort achieves a concensus among then-active members of the community by the stated expiration date, a patch to update the entry's expiration date may be accepted, thereby prolonging its shelf life. Unless such a thing happens before the expiration date comes, we will mechanically drop the entry.

Of course people _can_ resurrect an expired entry later as a new one when it seems appropriate.

That makes the decision to expire things from the list easy to make.

This is a tangent, perhaps we should adopt the same "drop mechanically purely based on timestamp, but allow resuscitation" rule for topic branches that take forever to hit 'next'. It would make my life a little bit simpler ;-).

Thanks.