On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 04:20:33PM +0000, David Kastrup wrote: > "Medve Emilian-EMMEDVE1" <Emilian.Medve@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Hi Pierre, > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Pierre Habouzit [mailto:madcoder@xxxxxxxxxx] > >> Sent: Friday, October 05, 2007 10:57 AM > >> To: Medve Emilian-EMMEDVE1 > >> Cc: Mike Hommey; Kristian Høgsberg; git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; > >> Junio C Hamano > >> Subject: Re: [ALTERNATE PATCH] Add a simple option parser. > >> > >> On ven, oct 05, 2007 at 03:45:36 +0000, Medve Emilian-EMMEDVE1 wrote: > >> > You probably already considered and rejected the GNU argp parser. I > >> > used it before and I'd like to know reasons I should stay away from > >> > it. > >> > >> Because it's GNU and that it's a heavy dependency to begin with. > > > > So it's more of a political decision then a technical one? > > Well, if it is GNU then it is likely to mean GPLv3 (or GPLv3+) at some > point of time, though it should certainly be possible for now to still > secure a v2-licensed version (either GPL or LGPL). That is an issue indeed. > And the typical git developer AFAICT prefers to consider themselves as > unaligned with GNU and the FSF as much as possible. And is nothing near reality in my case. The real issue is dependency and bloat. getopt_long would need the GNU implementation, That I believe depends upon gettext, and argp is just bloated, and I'm not even sure it's distributed outside from the glibc anyways. -- ·O· Pierre Habouzit ··O madcoder@xxxxxxxxxx OOO http://www.madism.org
Attachment:
pgpJt3N14CNbr.pgp
Description: PGP signature
