Re: [PATCH] build: get rid of the notion of a git library

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Tue, Jun 11, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>>> What are the examples you have in mind, code that we want to forbid
>>> standalone from using?
>>
>> init_copy_notes_for_rewrite(). Nothing outside the 'git' binary would
>> need that. If you disagree, show me an example.
>
> "Nothing would need that", if you are talking about the current
> codebase, I would agree that nothing would link to it.
>
> But that is not a good justification for closing door to others that
> come later who may want to have a standalone that would want to use
> it.  Think about rewriting filter-branch.sh in C but not as a
> built-in, for example.

Why would anybody rewrite filter-branch, and not make it a builtin? It
should be a builtin. That's the whole point of builtins.

Moreover, if you are going to argue that we shouldn't be closing the
door, then why not link ./builtin/*.o to libgit.a? If you are
seriously considering the highly unlikely hypothetical standalone
git-filter-branch scenario, you should consider the even more likely
scenario where somebody needs to access code from ./builtin/*.o; that
scenario is not even hypothetical, we know it's happened multiple
times, and we know it's going to happen again.

-- 
Felipe Contreras
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html




[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]