From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: git push precautions Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 18:03:06 +0200 Message-ID: <83wq45mv5x.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20150128032211.21589.96959@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <87mw53zijz.fsf@building.gnus.org> <54C883B8.6050506@cs.ucla.edu> <87twzbv1x0.fsf@building.gnus.org> <54C88CB2.1030608@cs.ucla.edu> <87iofrv0as.fsf@building.gnus.org> <87a913uzt5.fsf@building.gnus.org> <83mw52or5g.fsf@gnu.org> <87oapilpum.fsf_-_@violet.siamics.net> <83bnlioify.fsf@gnu.org> <87mw52pwka.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <838ugmogx2.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1422547422 5642 80.91.229.3 (29 Jan 2015 16:03:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 16:03:42 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dak@gnu.org, ivan@siamics.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Yuri Khan Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jan 29 17:03:41 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1YGrZC-0005PB-FF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 17:03:38 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60524 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YGrZB-0007sn-V7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 11:03:37 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54198) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YGrYv-0007sh-RF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 11:03:22 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YGrYu-0003xZ-TW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 11:03:21 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]:63397) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YGrYn-0003wN-Pa; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 11:03:13 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NIY00C004C5VX00@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 18:03:12 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NIY00CUL4LAOR60@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Thu, 29 Jan 2015 18:03:11 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.172 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:181988 Archived-At: > From: Yuri Khan > Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2015 12:39:24 +0700 > Cc: David Kastrup , ivan@siamics.net, Emacs developers= >=20 > > But that problem no longer exists in current versions of Git. Wh= y > > should I punish myself on behalf of Git versions I never used and > > never will be? It sounds perverse. >=20 > You cannot assume current Git on all systems, yet. We are not talking about general population here. We are talking about contributors who are actively tracking the Emacs development an= d committing changes to the repository. Those contributors are already required to use relatively recent versions of the development tools. There's nothing wrong in assuming a recent enough Git and in recommending that contributors upgrade to such a recent version. > You personally can use whatever practice you deem safe and convenie= nt, > but if we=E2=80=99re talking about generic recommendations, we have= to account > for old Git versions. The vast majority here has Git that is recent enough. It is okay to say in addition "but if you have Git older than X.Y.Z, do this like s= o instead". But giving _only_ such recipes, that are unduly complicate= d because they work with the lowest common denominator, means punishing the majority for the benefit of a tiny, perhaps non-existent minority= , when applied to people for which the issue at hand (pushing to the Emacs repo) is relevant. It strikes the wrong balance, IMO.