RE: [RFC PATCH v3 0/7] Introduce clar testing framework

[<rsbecker@nexbridge.com>]

On Monday, August 12, 2024 4:50 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com> writes:
>
>> I'm generally in favor of this change, but I'm still unsure what our
>> plan is for importing this from upstream clar. Are we going to vendor
>> our own copy here and (hopefully) someone will pay attention to
>> upstream fixes and apply them to our copy? Or will we replace this
>> with a submodule?
>
>As long as we do not have to make any changes to the "vendored" code ourselves,
>that would not matter.  We will not randomly update the gitlink that specifies "we
>want to use _this_ version and not other version of upstream clar" without good
>reasons if you are using it as a submodule, and we would need to justify why we
>are updating the hierarchy if we import the hierarchy as vendored source.  So the
>hassle of "updating from upstream" is pretty much the same.
>
>For something as small as "clar", I think it is fine to start with the currently proposed
>layout and see what happens.  If we can keep going without touching the imported
>part of the sources at all, and the system proves to be useful and stable, that is a
>good time to suggest moving it out and binding the selected version of the
>upstream as a submodule.

I think we already have a copy customized for git's use. The main clar repo on its own
has portability issues. I have contributed a few fixes, but they need work.