From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthew Wilcox Subject: Re: [kernel.org users] [RFD] On deprecating "git-foo" for builtins Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 18:17:05 -0600 Message-ID: <20080827001705.GG23698@parisc-linux.org> References: <7vprnzt7d5.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <1219664940.9583.42.camel@pmac.infradead.org> <7vy72kek6y.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20080826145719.GB5046@coredump.intra.peff.net> <7vr68b8q9p.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jeff King , David Woodhouse , git@vger.kernel.org, Johannes Schindelin , users@kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Aug 27 02:19:25 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KY8kp-0002eN-EG for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 27 Aug 2008 02:19:19 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752206AbYH0ASO (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Aug 2008 20:18:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751887AbYH0ASO (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Aug 2008 20:18:14 -0400 Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:58216 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751346AbYH0ASO (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 Aug 2008 20:18:14 -0400 Received: by mail.parisc-linux.org (Postfix, from userid 26919) id F4098494005; Tue, 26 Aug 2008 18:17:05 -0600 (MDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vr68b8q9p.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: 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. -- Matthew Wilcox Intel Open Source Technology Centre "Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this operating system, but compare it to ours. We can't possibly take such a retrograde step."