From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jonathan Nieder Subject: Re: [PATCH/RFC] Move contents of libgit.a to lib subdirectory Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 01:47:13 -0500 Message-ID: <20110620064713.GA27992@elie> References: <7vd3i9dow4.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Shawn Pearce , Peter Foley , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jun 20 08:47:30 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QYYGg-0006oh-83 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 08:47:30 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753110Ab1FTGrZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2011 02:47:25 -0400 Received: from mail-iw0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]:63809 "EHLO mail-iw0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752315Ab1FTGrZ (ORCPT ); Mon, 20 Jun 2011 02:47:25 -0400 Received: by iwn6 with SMTP id 6so935585iwn.19 for ; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 23:47:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=hZF+5JFjCNu5F+aMAbkJiNMcYTqu58FmIYt5iVbciJo=; b=iKeaAuYf/0I3hMIwtkA9ety/YVbQOA/vMPAyAdhhqrVD0J9uz34r4re2lRkPm1c0NB QEv4YH3yutSo5RfW8e6gzmgBtHbikBiswg1A9q9NvngmNWbZqq4cVwEJV6ona9yZfY7q bq/m5HUL/XiVdjBM96XQbRMydJhxdoKNyQyIA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=upoglRyDK1tY3u8K0/eh2rCxA15/XPMWYHk7+7rOn/17boNI+d5ZAk/Er4Il8LzS04 AJhVVw8HC5+BLPAm08cQlW9Ri7pQd49YKjwvl+7Ol/mtlGAElJAV8eWoj+jLCDImYQdE ciuo34l34xgrfsX8B9/8Qf1GCYlxDdMrJm/aI= Received: by 10.231.117.35 with SMTP id o35mr4805177ibq.149.1308552444461; Sun, 19 Jun 2011 23:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from elie (adsl-69-209-50-158.dsl.chcgil.sbcglobal.net [69.209.50.158]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ft12sm3005769ibb.36.2011.06.19.23.47.22 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Sun, 19 Jun 2011 23:47:23 -0700 (PDT) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vd3i9dow4.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > Shawn Pearce writes: >> ... But why is this amount of churn necessary or being >> recommended? What problem does this address? Is that worth the pain >> this puts on every other in-flight change that is still being >> developed, or is already in the review pipeline? > > No reason and not recommended; nothing; not worth. > > Especially during the pre-release freeze. It's unlikely the patch would be cooked by the time there is a release, or even in the moments of quiet after that. If this were a patch intended for immediate inclusion, the timing would be unfortunate, but for an RFC I wouldn't have expected the release timing to be very relevant. A better thought out version of this patch, meaning timed appropriately and taking into account the comments that came up the last times the subject was discussed, would imho be a good thing. Part of thinking it through is to consider the effect on in-flight patches and to consider whether it's possible to mitigate that. In other words, I think Shawn's questions get right to the point. I hope the above answers --- which do seem to correctly reflect the state of things in absence of such thinking --- will not dissuade someone from finding a good answer. More prior discussion for the sort of masochistic person who wants to work on it: [1]. I admit I can imagine easier tasks. :) Just my two cents, Jonathan [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/165748/focus=165801