From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (pb-smtp21.pobox.com [173.228.157.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A1EE1AA3FF for ; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 21:24:38 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.53 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722374679; cv=none; b=FvdV5FlefVn+EKenPeunSQIkca5EN4n5yuJUiZ9A1jZd0khUICX0FgkUdw2M4LSdHjw6Fvc4iuQxNmP2pe1iMtKNqRwAIJS62SCAWKKkmev0G1pQMtFlexUOcgloCfgGxsT2Vu/0OXqtlIYpQC0RaTFhmYyiY4j+s4a5JkCIkfw= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1722374679; c=relaxed/simple; bh=Ws26fgUGx4I4Zehu1eod133VvUUC1a05JlekYJLX1TQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=Ozdi+x6rFtqsiLiYhaldyNFucY1RtWk1jB9owG6bgKEWFRTn0OdBLDh9Qh3b+kBRXLJOTIFGlShsuSv42fmaOk2SW+1Zcw2om/bbnX4tOiPniaGqFueyJI+UaDM1K5kXMvwSE6BL3LdQlNW9wg03cbLXzWxHYx14WXT2L1LQdTc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=cvfHdviL; arc=none smtp.client-ip=173.228.157.53 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="cvfHdviL" Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B1B301C14A; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 17:24:37 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=Ws26fgUGx4I4Zehu1eod133VvUUC1a05JlekYJ LX1TQ=; b=cvfHdviLnD+unXYo+z9spfq+O8hb2J0F+zI4eVxQpgF7Lsa6xdAUWG 43ffWczrZWYYx3wPs/QA9bEZas1jHHU2lY21bdLgWm0xLjx2P91Aad8ZJDExd8as mBmk8T7KTNFm6Mw8879w6wdhV46iXuLoxUlSLeVbMGTwplU+1AktE= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA6791C149; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 17:24:37 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.139.61]) (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 BEE7D1C148; Tue, 30 Jul 2024 17:24:33 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Emily Shaffer Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, "Randall S. Becker" , Taylor Blau , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] Documentation: add platform support policy In-Reply-To: (Emily Shaffer's message of "Tue, 30 Jul 2024 13:41:30 -0700") References: <20240730175448.1727373-1-emilyshaffer@google.com> Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 14:24:32 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 1D85F43C-4EBA-11EF-8A3B-9625FCCAB05B-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Emily Shaffer writes: >> > +Note that this document is about maintaining existing support for a platform >> > +that has generally worked in the past; for adding support to a platform which >> > +doesn't generally work with Git, the stakeholders for that platform are expected >> > +to do the bulk of that work themselves. We will consider such patches if they >> > +don't make life harder for other supported platforms, and you may well find a >> > +contributor interested in working on that support, but the Git community as a >> > +whole doesn't feel an obligation to perform such work. >> >> The part after "... and you may well find" reads a bit muddy. I >> couldn't tell if it is talking about the initial port, or continued >> support, or both. >> ... > I like that message, but what I was trying to say with that sentence > was "if you get lucky, some volunteer might want to help you with the > initial port". FWIW, I do not quite like that message; I agree that it would be good to tell them that they may not entirely be on their own, if they ask nicely, but no promises ;-). > It seems worth at least pointing out that that would be > the exception, not the rule, but I probably already do that well > enough with the previous sentence ("the platform stakeholders are > expected to do the bulk of the work"). Let me reword the last > sentence, then: > > "We will consider patches that port a new platform if they don't make > life harder for other support platforms or for Git contributors. Some > Git contributors may volunteer to help with the initial or continued > support, but that is not a given. Support work which is too intrusive > or difficult for the project to maintain may still not be accepted." OK, at least that clarifies the point I was puzzled about.