From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mail-qv1-f51.google.com (mail-qv1-f51.google.com [209.85.219.51]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C261A1CCB31 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 19:23:07 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.219.51 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728674589; cv=none; b=dh1ccB4lIBGGCc7GiECw3dlM94h/0faCmDdaIEqI4TDld294jIhP80glVbgtot6Dj4SVIRMLeeKLUp2WK58vGJ+RwMxhxewk77TXixiS9KXUpa+tCBeY/S/w67ng5JmqLiiwHEl339G8bRkCcSRpKDrRpEHeJFsMYZ38RJHv90A= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1728674589; c=relaxed/simple; bh=1Xqa/TfWER4hIvjPJElz2+JPmDqSd2nhMNB0ORQjLMI=; h=MIME-Version:References:In-Reply-To:From:Date:Message-ID:Subject: To:Cc:Content-Type; b=V4NDQTI1m1sASbdkVIr2Xay22GeXg8ZFYkKpCoCBBJi3n3rj6fbbLdvp0TYrYV+SF+f6gViKtwkBvDcL2ghl3a5PPNnVSef8kky7QgzzrXVW4yaJBPRVF/NBPujxiwQ8/aM4paWsk3MqhBEpUAUMB8lGaFL7yf2qb1PRoPiygt4= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sunshineco.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com; arc=none smtp.client-ip=209.85.219.51 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=sunshineco.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=gmail.com Received: by mail-qv1-f51.google.com with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6cbf8cee5aaso565376d6.3 for ; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 12:23:07 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1728674587; x=1729279387; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=WA6QyP1S7nfDJxs4Oyd2ViYRVReeAK0UnblAuwpbprY=; b=G4ADEz16yY1lr6eYdZ1NwPPlOPRErJfwdszs/O7nkmsm21+BX/q4Y/K4AAi8zU8InP XeEb4yyExKuTIK3sd3pvK8Q5clxY6V4eHPjGWt0dQt7O8dv6ZARkvw7EKuapLZ3wjyAZ +of7IsjjNIb0iaxwD9GtDUPo4xu+rDHCtcXOLv1QbonCa/J0v2iV/jgFnwZ4vhFHw05f ifPPOjFbxNn04MVm0JPn+Z6VTUFqDcqTnVSNKyDW4qg8ZZ4CSSqJhJOgQrhHOVWEPIc7 WzQH4xN7YLPbbgILiYN7MiUejZCmqCYcOtuFXooaU8ClG+W1dzNvsbaosj/qvmYvp9B3 M1ow== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWeqw3m9BtFfnrqH8POKg0CxV6/pzB3+jM6zp2akb9Qe/CGVmie/MZCL9Bskg4KEj+hNhM=@vger.kernel.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzVOGQYMchStZzZPsnLFAqwhiettjrOZnuJjsa3cALIoLpwiBXW 3XWtpSIZBZh7YSCoDarxUAY3hWEnAIteUioKJrvGcll/XapJ/7a400YLQPoGOQa4fSe3Lquoxzl EGVIhldvTxQZcExV1gccbFg2zYf4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFMyVDWMc3tVOAhIgOWH4+dHnVW0riUGMs6evO3pM11CpgBVw+twmgFzpUqO6gZvB6TdtwIplGHaZIjc/7NjFU= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:5291:b0:6c3:69f9:fb5b with SMTP id 6a1803df08f44-6cbefe46ec0mr24790616d6.0.1728674586815; Fri, 11 Oct 2024 12:23:06 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20241010235621.738239-1-sandals@crustytoothpaste.net> <20241011074022.GC18010@coredump.intra.peff.net> In-Reply-To: From: Eric Sunshine Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2024 15:22:55 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] Update versions of libcurl and Perl To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Jeff King , "brian m. carlson" , git@vger.kernel.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Alejandro_R=2E_Sede=C3=B1o?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Oct 11, 2024 at 2:35=E2=80=AFPM Junio C Hamano = wrote: > Eric Sunshine writes: > > I may be in the minority here, but I'm fairly negative on this entire > > patch series. As you say, supporting these old versions is effectively > > zero-cost, so how does this project benefit from these changes which > > potentially "break" Git for users on older platforms? I see no upside > > here. The cover letter provides no strong justification for > > (potentially) inconveniencing people; the argument about being able to > > utilize more modern Perl features is weak[1] at best and is not > > convincing. > > Having said all that, I did find it was surprising that we raised to > a merely 6-year old cutoff point. If it were discarding versions of > libraries that are older than 12 years (instead of 6 years), would > you be having the same reaction? I almost certainly would have had the same reaction had it been 12 years instead of 6. As one who "lives" with these old platforms both professionally and personally, I'm sensitive to the issue because I have been burned too many times by projects arbitrarily dropping support for older platforms (or, more generally, not taking their user population into consideration when making arbitrary changes). I would be much more tolerant and understanding of changes with substantial and provable value, such as ridding the project of a high-cost maintenance burden, or eliminating some maldesign which impedes implementation of some new important feature (or even which impedes fixing some serious flaw). But the patch series under discussion does not fall into those categories; it (potentially) penalizes an arbitrary chunk of the Git user base without any obvious benefit to the project itself.