Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Sun, Dec 01, 2019 at 10:19:15PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > Not-Reviewed-by: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@xxxxxxxxx> >> > >> > --- the patch shouldn't be applied as is. >> > ... >> > Agreed: if we want to follow this approach, we should install stubs in >> > place of those scripts when NO_PERL=YesPlease. Will say more about >> > this in a separate reply. >> >> I am just leaving a note here in the thread to make sure I notice if >> there is any progress/conclusion, until which time I'll keep the >> patch on hold. Thanks. > > Thinking on this more, it might not be a bad idea to take Ruud's initial > patch here. It certainly makes things better for his NO_PERL case now, > and then in the future we can either: > > - stop building request-pull entirely with NO_PERL, but we'd still need > the tests to realize that we shouldn't be testing it > > - change request-pull to not require perl, at which point we'd remove > this restriction Hmph, that is a reasonable stance to take, I would think. Let's move it forward. Thanks.
