From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail.manjaro.org (mail.manjaro.org [116.203.91.91]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 09C4A189518 for ; Mon, 12 Aug 2024 18:08:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723486122; cv=none; b=OVbFWO724Vzol02s80QocwGhfpO4NiPE34s+c3G84R5xZDuNnlqjZNLqxhRhQOnCMYy00CVuuXB1OrnWTfuZ0FybF2Z/yFx2J3lsydEhxX5vpHNbuh6mrUPBxZMVonK51MK18mTSqFpupnSvH1mFBOZU+YJWQ4Vn+amN6J5mjJI= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1723486122; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1Semz3EU+Bm1GGvGnEqBMT2JPpcnSvJvhST4JLxNFX4=; h=MIME-Version:Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Message-ID:Content-Type; b=NibHgt+JnRV42DYjmbqJBatLXg8WH2AUH1L8SzuaWNK+iqhC88rSmIuMc3NyVZHCAHBCqRsUCxu160aKMJl3cmQVLpn1mw7crHrI/KyjqM1zAGEDZkXgG9T80czTI515sDKcBZlW4TyuK3MFUzZlY+FAavm0hikMDs4Jgqz7sOQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b=H7WWpvNM; arc=none smtp.client-ip=116.203.91.91 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=quarantine dis=none) header.from=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=manjaro.org Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=manjaro.org header.i=@manjaro.org header.b="H7WWpvNM" Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=manjaro.org; s=2021; t=1723486110; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=/+DwRRh3ZQrziw/P20DBL/9YQhjB5yf0OxTUQnxRHM8=; b=H7WWpvNMPEuRsuCw6y0m3XF6L3tlmmK3or2sVZDPJoq8Irbqcb5UYkya8zMQMIKPGJQ7oG wBnID0spfNHhKbJaqsDYTRiIsOg6GIgea6uUNAU666KHGdtSVu0fwNqP7rIFZ7/zjDXZxo tKz0K+V6btrSERjHOifJem54ZUXm00ybhw8YP7TCGacVg98Smj2xv/kvKkeG+VF5sytz/w 7tMWhcQFSN3M2noAwa5TUX4fnUL6aC7uRV0btEimLNDvOf8G4FqsLyC9mHmbIRjq75aw2S B4+Tm/if4zu2ZTf2mxr1mw/H+DD14Ze8LI3rqno6zNLKRGaHJxkOWw82eb8IFw== Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2024 20:08:28 +0200 From: Dragan Simic To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Eric Sunshine , "Jason A. Donenfeld" , Josh Steadmon , git@vger.kernel.org, calvinwan@google.com, spectral@google.com, emilyshaffer@google.com, emrass@google.com, rsbecker@nexbridge.com, mh@glandium.org, sandals@crustytoothpaste.net Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/5] Introduce cgit-rs, a Rust wrapper around libgit.a In-Reply-To: References: <6398d60387a6607398e4b8731363572e@manjaro.org> Message-ID: <3df4270de4e37121084aafcbce1c7450@manjaro.org> X-Sender: dsimic@manjaro.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Authentication-Results: ORIGINATING; auth=pass smtp.auth=dsimic@manjaro.org smtp.mailfrom=dsimic@manjaro.org On 2024-08-12 10:15, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Eric Sunshine writes: > >> On Sun, Aug 11, 2024 at 1:27 PM Dragan Simic >> wrote: >>> On 2024-08-10 15:15, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: >>> > Still the same name for v2? Cmon. >>> >>> Yeah, I was also surprised to see that. This _isn't_ cgit. >> >> Josh addressed this point in the v2 cover letter by saying: >> >> Known NEEDSWORK: >> ... >> * Bikeshed on the name > > I do not quite consider it as as "addressed this point" to just slap > a NEEDSWORK label and doing nothing else, though. > > The original iteration had this: > > * bikeshedding on the name (yes, really). There is an active, > unrelated > CGit project [4] that we only recently became aware of. We > originally > took the name "cgit" because at $DAYJOB we sometimes refer to > git.git > as "cgit" to distinguish it from jgit [5]. > > and then now they as well as reviewers all have seen the tentative > cgit name, saw the reaction it caused, and now know that not just > potentially confusing other project _exists_, but it does matter. > > Reviewers already have spent some time on suggesting that "git" part > should not be "c"git, as well as "rs" part may better be "sys", > etc.?. There should be _some_ response, even if it does not yet > propose a new name. > > If it acknowledged that the time and knowledge reviewers gave the > topic were appreciated, e.g., "The proposers of this topic saw THIS > point and THAT point as a input that we WILL need to consider when > we decide on the name. We acknowledge that the name "cgit-rs" is > not ideal and needs to be changed. But we haven't reached any > concrete alternative name yet, so this round still uses the same > name", I'd call that "addressed this point", though. > > But just a dismissing "Bikeshed on the name", as if they do not care > to be mistaken as saying "those who complain about the name are only > bikeshedding and not worth listening to"? > > We should do better than that. I really appreciate and support your response, Junio. Brushing it off originally as "bikeshedding" did leave a sour taste, because it presented the conflicting naming as a non-issue.