From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] remote-helpers: point at their upstream repositories Date: Fri, 16 May 2014 04:41:26 -0400 Message-ID: <20140516084126.GB21468@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri May 16 10:43:17 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 1WlDjY-0006Jk-QT for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 16 May 2014 10:43:17 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756660AbaEPInK (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 May 2014 04:43:10 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:52881 "HELO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753751AbaEPIl2 (ORCPT ); Fri, 16 May 2014 04:41:28 -0400 Received: (qmail 5160 invoked by uid 102); 16 May 2014 08:41:28 -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; Fri, 16 May 2014 03:41:28 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 16 May 2014 04:41:26 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 03:56:29PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Two announcements for their version 0.2 on the list archive are not > quite enough to advertise them to their users. I do not think this README nor a mention in the release notes will get their attention either, and many people (and packagers) will continue to use the stale versions forever until those versions go away. I would much rather _replace_ them with a README in the long run, and people will notice that they are gone, and then use the README to update their install procedure. For 2.0, I am hesitant to do that, though I do not have a problem with a README like this as a heads-up to prepare packagers for the future. I say hesitant because people may have been test-packaging 2.0.0-rc3 in preparation for release, and it will be annoying to them to suddenly switch. But that being said, this is Felipe's code. While we have a legal right to distribute it in v2.0, if he would really prefer it out for v2.0, I would respect that. I would prefer to instrument the code with warnings, as that is the sort of thing a packager moving from -rc3 to -final might not notice, and shipping the warnings to end users who did not package the software in the first place will not help them. It is the attention of the packagers (and source-builders) you want to get. Of course that is all just my two cents, and is mostly predicated on there _being_ packagers of the contrib/ tools. It looks like there is a Debian package in RFP status, but I don't know if that is following the new release closely. And I don't know about other systems. -Peff