Am 12.02.2018 um 22:04 schrieb Junio C Hamano:
> Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> I thought it may be a helpful
>> for merging this series with the rest of the evolved code base which
>> may make use of one of the converted functions. So instead of fixing
>> that new instance manually, cocinelle could do that instead.
>
> Having the .cocci used for the conversion *somewhere* would indeed
> be helpful, as it allows me to (1) try reproducing this patch by
> somebody else using the file and following the steps in order to
> audit this patch and (2) catch new places that need to be migrated
> in in-flight topics.
>
> But placing it in contrib/coccinelle/ has other side effects.
Running "make coccicheck" takes longer. What other downsides are
there?
> I can think of two precedents in this project, namely:
>
> - fixup-builtins in 36e5e70e ("Start deprecating "git-command" in
> favor of "git command"", 2007-06-30)
>
> - convert-cache in d98b46f8 ("Do SHA1 hash _before_ compression.",
> 2005-04-20)
>
> that are about tools that is useful during a transition period but
> can and should be removed after transition is over. These two were
> done as one-off and added at the top-level, but perhaps we want a
> new directory at the top (e.g. devtools/) to add things like this
> and hold them while they are relevant?
Semantic patches for completed transformations can be removed as
well (or archived, e.g. by renaming to .cocci.done or so).
René
