Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > Maybe I should point out something that is obvious to somebody who > followed the Git list for a long time: there are two areas of the code > that had such a track record of regressions that Junio grew a distaste for > them: git-config and parse options. There is a difference between them; please don't confuse new readers. git-config does have a rather unfortunate track record and the code may still be a mess. But parse-options itself is a good code overall. Only that some of the parse-opt-ification attempts in the past might have been quite bad. Parse-opt-ification is an obvious, trivial change with a limited scope, well-defined end results and clear gain to the end users. The API exists so the patch author does not have to invent a new framework, the change a patch needs will typically be limited to a single command, the set of options the command needs to accept/reject are already defined, and at the end you can give unique prefix of flags from the command line. There may be a correlation between parse-opt-ification attempts and bad review cycles, but there is no such a causal relationship "parse-opt patches are bad because parse-opt is a bad idea". If there is such a correlation, it is more likely that it is merely because parse-opt-ification attracted more inexperienced people than tricker areas like revision traversal or extended SHA-1 syntax. But people can send bad patches to any area ;-). -- 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
