On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 10:48 AM, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote: > Erik Faye-Lund wrote: >> On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Felipe Contreras >> <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > If you want this script to remain in contrib, please: >> > >> > a) Write at least a few tests >> > b) Write some documentation >> > c) Explain why it cannot live outside the git.git repository like other >> > tools.  >> >> (Adding Marius, the original author to the CC-list) >> >> Uh, why is such a burden required all of a sudden? contrib/README >> mentions no such requirements, and the scripts have been accepted (and >> maintained) since. > > contrib/README mentions clearly the expectation that these scripts > eventually move to the core once they mature. This is never going to > happen for these.
Yes, *expectation*. Not requirement. > It also mentions that inactive ones would be proposed for removal, and > this one is clearly inactive. It has 9 commits (if you count the one > that changes the execution bit). It mentions that Junio *might* suggest things to be removed, not that things *should* be removed if left unmaintained. And this script is not unmaintained, it's simply just still working. >> Besides, you say "No activity since 2010" - this is not the case, >> bc380fc is from November 2013. > > You think changing the execution bit of a file is considered "activity"? > Well, now we're getting into semantics, which I don't care so much about. It shows some sort of interest in the scripts, at least. >> And there's already *some* documentation in the scripts themselves. > > That's nice. So you can just copy that into a README. Feel free to scratch that itch yourself, you're the one inventing new requirements here. >> Please stop your pointless crusade that'll only break other people's >> work-flows. > > If you care about these scripts, it should be trivial for you to add at > least a few tests, souldn't it? Again, testing this is not my itch. Feel free to scratch that one yourself, but please don't remove the script. > Please tell me how exactly will your work-flow be broken. More > specifically, tell me why your scripts cannot be moved outside of git, > like git-extras, git-deploy, git-ftp, and countless other > tools. Moving the script out of the repo makes it less convenient to bisect issues with MSVC, as it depends heavily on the top-level Makefile. Moving it out would require figuring out what version of the script matches a given git revision, which is a hassle. Again, please stop this pointless crusade. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html