From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] subtree/Makefile: Standardize (esp. for packagers) Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2014 03:25:20 -0400 Message-ID: <20140426072520.GB7558@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1398304336-1879-1-git-send-email-nod.helm@gmail.com> <3cb4338e-de68-404d-86dc-70cac7e13606@email.android.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: nod.helm@gmail.com X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Apr 26 09:26:07 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Wdwzu-0002CO-5P for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Apr 2014 09:26:06 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750989AbaDZHZX (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Apr 2014 03:25:23 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:38892 "HELO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750728AbaDZHZW (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 Apr 2014 03:25:22 -0400 Received: (qmail 28932 invoked by uid 102); 26 Apr 2014 07:25:22 -0000 Received: from c-71-63-4-13.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.63.4.13) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Sat, 26 Apr 2014 02:25:22 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 26 Apr 2014 03:25:20 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3cb4338e-de68-404d-86dc-70cac7e13606@email.android.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sat, Apr 26, 2014 at 02:56:15PM +1000, nod.helm@gmail.com wrote: > > contrib/subtree/Makefile is a shambles in regards to it's consistency > > with other makefiles, which makes subtree overly painful to include in > > build scripts. > > > > Two major issues are present: > > > > Firstly, calls to git itself (for $(gitdir) and $(gitver)), making > > building difficult on systems that don't have git. > > > > Secondly, the Makefile uses the variable $(libexecdir) for defining the > > exec path. > > > > (...) > > I hate to be that guy, but could I get an opinion on the proposed patch? It's OK to be that guy; prompting or reposting when a patch has been overlooked is normal here. > Is git interested in purely makefile patches, or should I find further > improvements to make in subtree and purpose this again with those? Makefile improvements are fine on their own. I think the problem is that contrib/subtree does not really have an active dedicated area maintainer. Your changes look fine to me from a cursory examination. It would probably be more readable as four patches (the 3 "fix" points from your list, plus the "minor fixes" mentioned at the end). Then each patch stands on its own, can say what problem it's fixing, and how. > I've left `rm -f -r subproj mainline` in the clean rule for now, > however I'd suggest those actually belong in > contrib/subtree/t/Makefile:clean, given that they are only ever > generated by `make test`. But given that there aren't any other > comparable setups in contrib/, I'm somewhat apprehensive to move them > without opinion. Do we even make those directories anymore? It looks like they are part of the tests, but the whole test script runs inside its own trash directory. I wonder if they are vestiges from the time when subtree was its own repository outside of contrib/. If so, they can be dropped here (and from .gitignore). -Peff