On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Al Viro <viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 11:57:56AM +0300, Felipe Contreras wrote: > >> The masses should forget about the git-foo form. If you push people >> into using git-foo then you are not following git guidelines; you >> would be pushing your own agenda. > > Egads... For sarcasm it's far too heavy-handed and if that's for real... > What's next, verbal diarrhea about Diluting the Message(tm)? Sorry, I guess I should have made it clearer. I haven't made my mind about git-foo vs "git foo", but a decision has been made to deprecate git-foo, and allow it as an option for the people that really want to use it, right? So there must have been a reason to deprecate git-foo, if people keep using git-foo, and distributions keep allowing it, what's the point of deprecation? It's ok if they keep that usage to themselves, like 'alias ll = ls -l', but it's not something to assume everybody uses. So either we take back the decision and keep discussing if it's a good idea to deprecate git-foo, or we go forward and discourage git-foo completely. Anything in the middle would just confuse people more, and wouldn't achieve the purpose of deprecation. If some script is relying on git-foo, and it has been deprecated, it should be fixed. Best regards. -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
