William Giokas wrote:
> On Fri, May 16, 2014 at 05:21:36AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> > How exactly would it be better?
> > 
> > If you concede that the Git release wouldn't be affected, then assuming
> > a hypothetical future where git-remote-hg is bundled, and we have a
> > Mercurial API breakage, we would have:
> > 
> >  Git < v2.5 fail, Git >= 2.5 get the fix
> > 
> > If we unbundle, we have:
> > 
> >  git-remote-hg < v0.5 fail, git-remote-hg >= v0.5 get the fix
> > 
> > What is the big difference?
> It's a matter of scope and where the releases happen, that is all.

Of course the core vs. out-of-tree question is a matter of where the
releases happen. The question here was: in which way is out-of-tree a
better place?

If it's a matter of scope, that is; should a foreign vcs interface tool
be bundled in the Git core? Then that question applies not only to
git-remote-hg/bzr, but also git-p4, git-cvs, git-svn, and others.

The answer to the first question seems to be; it's not at all clear (in
fact there doesn't seem to be any valid argument in favour of
out-of-tree). The answer to the second question is; we are not asking
that question right now (for the moment foreign vcs tools should remain
part of the Git core).

I started the graduation series by saying "there doesn't seem to be any
good reason not to", and Junio agreed. Now Junio doesn't agree, but it's
till the case there's no good reason not to.

Felipe Contreras
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

Reply via email to