From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Chicken/egg problem building from a 'git clone' Date: Fri, 06 Feb 2009 02:28:48 -0800 Message-ID: <7vd4dv7tb3.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <7vfxis86tp.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vprhw6l1i.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: gyles19@visi.com, Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org To: Miles Bader X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Feb 06 11:30:34 2009 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 1LVNya-0007SR-CD for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 06 Feb 2009 11:30:24 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754158AbZBFK25 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Feb 2009 05:28:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754106AbZBFK25 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Feb 2009 05:28:57 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:61938 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753993AbZBFK24 (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Feb 2009 05:28:56 -0500 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 657CD2A8D7; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 05:28:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7CA252A8AF; Fri, 6 Feb 2009 05:28:50 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Miles Bader's message of "Fri, 06 Feb 2009 18:31:41 +0900") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: F4D602DA-F438-11DD-B664-6F7C8D1D4FD0-77302942!a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Miles Bader writes: > Junio C Hamano writes: >> >> Please do not encourge use of configure/autoconf *in this project*. > > Er ... I was not doing so. I was saying that if one is going to use > autoconf with git, one should use a non-ancient version. That is nice but the statement is only half-truth, and should be followed by ", but why bother? You do not even need to use configure to build git, and insn is all here...". Omitting that latter half and instead having him spend time to update autoconf, which is not even needed, sounds like strongly encouraging its use to me. > I don't think merely discussing autoconf+git without pejorative asides > is "encouraging use". "You should use recent enough autoconf *if* you want to use configure, but why bother? You do not even need to use configure to build git, and here is how..." does not say anything pejorative about autoconf, either, and it is certainly not encouraging its use. On the other hand, omitting "but why bother?" part is, and the reason is not because it does not badmouth autoconf, but because use of autoconf is non-essential in this project.