From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.9 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 41C3EC433E1 for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 01:23:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E3862075B for ; Thu, 27 Aug 2020 01:23:06 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="ILAprtfy" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726788AbgH0BXF (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Aug 2020 21:23:05 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:62118 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726779AbgH0BXE (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Aug 2020 21:23:04 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E4842EFF0E; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 21:23:00 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=XrLz4YxuIoXBwoXRbOxckyDIHcA=; b=ILAprt fyetNxyN92eHNaXYxK1b6BC0At6u/i3VsGB5J4upUM7TI/sBq2xN+53210tmjWyy fhsfBYepEK5k3v4U14Zr8i9owY+uq4hRXWosxikmtP31GqbHmJKKty5M9TOUYyYh M07Ue2jGKzukGtrvn+PSjvAeBFTt12O2MwZ7g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=Ih2vaMrPwTPgTDWCDx2ZXf3TnE33zfVG dE/P9P14BVRXc9LNWAdRWCgg9oxyg71+IF8u3cjfyYSrRajzdRrEh5Aiyo5Qg9QP SFoaicZEs3wJkLRZEYSRY5hkuyHy3X+jCUsY4JDNrIZ1YTBtqJHyFD5teUg/5ceA k6q7QFpIFg4= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD8F8EFF0C; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 21:23:00 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.75.7.245]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2706EEFF08; Wed, 26 Aug 2020 21:22:58 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Derrick Stolee Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] avoid running "git-subcmd" in the dashed form References: <20200826194650.4031087-1-gitster@pobox.com> <07f26226-c1cd-494d-899e-d6452ad2751f@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 26 Aug 2020 18:22:56 -0700 In-Reply-To: <07f26226-c1cd-494d-899e-d6452ad2751f@gmail.com> (Derrick Stolee's message of "Wed, 26 Aug 2020 20:57:45 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: D73B57AE-E803-11EA-BD1E-843F439F7C89-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Derrick Stolee writes: > Would an interesting in-between step include removing the dashed > forms for builtins that didn't exist in Git 2.0? I am not sure if it makes much sense to treat newer and older built-in commands differently. Imagine that an old-timer wrote a script by somebody who trusted the "futz with PATH and you can use git-foo" promise before Git 2.0 and then the script was inherited by relatively new users. Adhering to the "when in doubt, mimic the surrounding code", which is usually a good discipline to follow, these new users, who are now in charge of maintaining the script, would add any new calls in "git-foo" form to match the local convention in good faith. And the resulting code would have been working just fine. Before such a "in-between step" is thrown at them, that is, at which point it stops working if they were unlucky that they used a relatively new built-ins. Typically new end-users would not know which ones are old built-ins and which ones are new, I suspect. I do agree with Dscho that "we won't let you use builtin in dashed form before you export an enviornment" I wrote was not a good way to gauge the usage of on-disk builtins. We should move the on-disk builtins to a different directory and have them point at the location with their $PATH as the escape hatch, as Dscho suggested, if we were to do this for real, I'd think. Thanks.