Hi Junio, On Fri, 6 Mar 2020, Junio C Hamano wrote: > What makes it possible by making "git bugreport" stand-alone is for > it to link with libraries that the remainder of Git, including the > transports that link with libcurl, has no business linking with (a > library to obtain system details for diagnostic purposes, for > example). That would, however, make `git-bugreport` more fragile than `git`, i.e. the former might fail to launch under more circumstances than the latter. Not a good idea for a tool meant to help reporting bugs, to be more fragile to even _start_ than `git`. A tool that is intended to help users come up with bug reports, despite the fact that users are totally unfamiliar with the implementation details of Git and hence unable to judge competently what information to include or to omit, needs to be _robust_. You do not want to end up, for example, calling a stale `git-bugreport` from an earlier `make install` (or from a different installation altogether). That would give the recipient not only bogus information, it would be outright misleading. And that's what I meant by "a stand-alone `git-bugreport` would not be a 1st-class citizen". I would see it as a serious design issue if this command is anything but a built-in. Ciao, Dscho
