From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.1 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_NONE shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDE121F461 for ; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 21:34:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S2390782AbfHVVef (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:34:35 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:57398 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1732656AbfHVVef (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:34:35 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6AADA715FD; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:34:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=lPwAex2At+n115zaiSXvWJs8bZE=; b=p+kCXF YjjGuxQvjvDOi+DSR+zIJEPYz15wjoY5313XDNWBg9aO5I/qW1pctDFp4uOKM/v2 fJg/eA6sSXmDdUN0KafYi9V6/JCiNzrZnLxYR3HPbrgNXqffZhbJxySRAbWcOxrr hZUnHpHLAwX907sgnzwYw+NVWGNVX5xBoFt1I= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=SJeDMObvstp7Ni6HbskumPB3MGwxfj9/ r9oxnFtjhkgHjMyiZrtKQ9YGqIF4W/yGVdF7p46l6sbGNR0++1TRX5+74hZumlVa oo48QIBT5dozROTjgzJNiJ8XGj416AFkFH0+rtb8vogrWUlQMyd5jjeSoSbnKmFt OaEN8gqUEY4= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63224715FC; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:34:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.76.80.147]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 89404715FB; Thu, 22 Aug 2019 17:34:30 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Elijah Newren Cc: Git Mailing List , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmo=?= =?utf-8?B?w7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason , Johannes Schindelin , Lars Schneider , Jonathan Nieder Subject: Re: RFC: Proposing git-filter-repo for inclusion in git.git References: Date: Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:34:28 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Elijah Newren's message of "Thu, 22 Aug 2019 14:12:42 -0700") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: A006735C-C524-11E9-824D-8D86F504CC47-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Elijah Newren writes: > Ooh, if you're going to open this door, then a proposal I assumed > would be shot down but which I'd be just about as happy with is: > > * Remove git-filter-branch from git.git. Mention in the release > notes where people can go to get it.[1] > ... Yup, I think, especially given now filter-repo exists and is well known by Git users, this is a good move in the mid to longer term. > For as long as git-filter-branch is part of git.git and other tools > are outside, people will take that as a strong endorsement from us for > filter-branch and use it regardless of how much other education > exists...and that causes problems. Exactly.