Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > Hi Junio, > > On Tue, 25 Aug 2020, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> If we were to propose removing "git-foo" binaries from the >> filesystem for built-in commands, we should first see if there are >> users who will be affected by such a move. When cmd_main() detects >> we were called not as "git", but as "git-foo", give an error message >> to ask the user to let us know and stop our removal plan, unless we >> are running a selected few programs that MUST be callable in the >> dashed form (e.g. "git-upload-pack"). >> >> Those who are always using "git foo" form will not be affected, but >> those who trusted the promise we made to them 12 years ago that by >> prepending the output of $(git --exec-path) to the list of >> directories on their $PATH, they can safely keep writing >> "git-cat-file" will be negatively affected as all their scripts >> assuming the promise will be kept are now broken. > > It might be a good idea to also instrument the existing scripts, to show > the same warning unless they were called through the `git` binary. > > _If_ we were to do this ;-) Sure. I am not the advocate for removing builtins from on-disk, though. The burden of proof... ;-)
