On Mon, Apr 19, 2021 at 9:36 PM Eric Wong <e@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Also, I wouldn't say I "gave up in frustration". It was a mostly > > unemotional decision on which of the many OSS projects I contribute to > > my rare spare time is spent best. > > I guess some things aren't for everybody. When I started > git-svn, I never expected git to be the right tool for others. > I figured most folks could just continue using SVN since they > seem to like centralized things or at least have some sort of > "authority" to look to. > > I'm largely uninvolved with git nowadays since I'm reasonably > satisfied with how it works; that and I prefer scripting > languages rather than ahead-of-time languages. True, since quite a while I'm also at a point where I'm satisfied with how Git (for Windows) works, so I also ceased to see the need to contribute. That's indeed another reason I forgot to mention. > To watch a particular filename, the "dfn:" prefix may be used. > The prefixes supported for a particular instance are documented in > <https://public-inbox.org/git/_/text/help/>, and you > can watch multiple files by combining with "OR". Thanks for pointing out these interesting features, I wasn't aware of them. > I don't think any sort of radicle "flag day" or tool mandate is > going to fly. I seem to recall at least one prominent Linux > kernel hacker doesn't even use git; though I'm not sure if > that's still the case. Like you said in the beginning, I guess some things aren't for everybody. > Email is already well-established with a good amount of small > players, and plain-text is relatively inexpensive. So it seems > best to build off the only halfway-decentralized thing we have > in wide use, rather than trying to start from scratch. While I can understand that conservative approach for a community around a tool as important as Git, I still fear that only ever sticking to technology that is already in wide use will hinder to look over the rim of the tea cup. -- Sebastian Schuberth
