Git development
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
To: Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@zib.de>
Cc: Johannes Sixt <johannes.sixt@telecom.at>,
	Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
	msysGit <msysgit@googlegroups.com>,
	Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Should we discuss Windows-related changes on git@vger.kernel.org?
Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:57:04 +0100 (BST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0807111652170.8950@racer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <65365AC4-D7C9-462B-8239-F3B35F7ECBEF@zib.de>

Hi,

On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Steffen Prohaska wrote:

> On Jul 11, 2008, at 1:56 PM, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> 
> >On Fri, 11 Jul 2008, Steffen Prohaska wrote:
> >
> > >I decided to stop queuing changes in 4msysgit.  Instead I'd like to
> > >bring the diff between Junio's and 4msysgit's master to zero.  This
> > >seems to be achievable after Junio merged Hannes' MinGW changes.
> > >
> > >I think all Windows-related changes to the git code base could be
> > >discussed directly on the main git list and the msysgit list would be
> > >reserved for the MinGW/MSYS runtime environment and the installer.
> >
> >I disagree.  Judging from the mails I read on the git list, Junio gets
> >really swamped by patches these days (what with our very productive GSoC
> >students).
> 
> Sending the patches to the git list does not necessarily mean that
> they are directly addressed to Junio.  We discuss JGIT, EGIT, gitk,
> and git gui patches on the list too.  AFAIK, none of them are applied
> by Junio directly but by the respective maintainers.  We could handle
> Windows-related patches similarly.

Then what is the msysGit list about?

No, I really disagree.  Windows support is too large a thing, and partly a 
too disgusting one to bother the git list.

> >I really think that we should discuss the patches on the msysGit list 
> >first, whip them into shape, and then send them off.
> >
> >Just think of those patches that were sent off, only to realize that 
> >they were no longer needed.  That should not have happened.
> 
> I intentionally sent the patches to show and discuss the differences 
> between the state of the MinGW port in Junio's master and in 4msysgit. 
> Some of the patches could be reverted in 4msysgit.  But, at least one 
> patch was unrelated to MinGW and is now in master.  Some other patches 
> need more work and are currently improved.  I think this was not a waste 
> of time.

IMO we could have discussed first what is the current state on the msysGit 
list, and I would have commented there already on the patches that I think 
would no longer be needed.

Then the patch would have been sent off, and be in master, too.

The difference: it would have been more efficient.  Those people who can 
test if something is still needed on Windows are on the msysGit list.

We do not really need to clutter git@vger more than necessary.

Ciao,
Dscho

  reply	other threads:[~2008-07-11 15:58 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-07-11  8:07 Should we discuss Windows-related changes on git@vger.kernel.org? Steffen Prohaska
2008-07-11 11:56 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-07-11 15:51   ` Steffen Prohaska
2008-07-11 15:57     ` Johannes Schindelin [this message]
2008-07-11 16:24       ` Steffen Prohaska
2008-07-11 18:36         ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-07-11 19:04           ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-11 19:40             ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-07-11 21:10               ` Steffen Prohaska
2008-07-11 21:38                 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-07-11 23:06                   ` Junio C Hamano
2008-07-11 23:37                     ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-07-12  8:07                   ` Steffen Prohaska
2008-07-11 22:14               ` Junio C Hamano
2008-07-11 23:35                 ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-07-11 23:40                   ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-11 23:47                     ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-07-11 23:58                       ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-12  0:06                         ` Johannes Schindelin
2008-07-12  1:07                         ` Linus Torvalds
2008-07-12  7:38                         ` Steffen Prohaska

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.DEB.1.00.0807111652170.8950@racer \
    --to=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=johannes.sixt@telecom.at \
    --cc=msysgit@googlegroups.com \
    --cc=prohaska@zib.de \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox