From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0EE1208B8 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2017 21:48:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752436AbdHIVsC (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2017 17:48:02 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:33888 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752378AbdHIVsB (ORCPT ); Wed, 9 Aug 2017 17:48:01 -0400 Received: (qmail 29716 invoked by uid 109); 9 Aug 2017 21:48:01 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Wed, 09 Aug 2017 21:48:01 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 31598 invoked by uid 111); 9 Aug 2017 21:48:23 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Wed, 09 Aug 2017 17:48:23 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 09 Aug 2017 17:47:58 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 17:47:58 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/4] dropping support for older curl Message-ID: <20170809214758.p77fqrwxanb4zn5a@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20170809120024.7phdjzjv54uv5dpz@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Aug 09, 2017 at 11:42:12PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > This is a resurrection of the thread from April: > > > > https://public-inbox.org/git/20170404025438.bgxz5sfmrawqswcj@sigill.intra.peff.net/ > > As before, I would like to point out that people running with older cURL > are most likely not at liberty to change the system libraries. > > I know that I didn't when I was working on a very expensive microscope > whose only certified control computer ran a very old version of CentOS, > and I really needed to install Git on it. > > In such a case, it is often preferable to be able to build against an old > cURL -- even if some of the fancier features might be broken, and even if > some minor compile errors need to be fixed. > > I know I was happy to compile Git against an ancient cURL back then. > > Just so you understand where I come from when I would like to caution > against dropping support for older cURL unless it *really* adds an > *enormous* amount of maintenance burden. > > I mean, if we even go out of our way to support the completely outdated > and obsolete .git/branches/ for what is likely a single user, it may not > be the worst to keep those couple of #ifdef guards to keep at least > nominal support for older cURLs? You've totally ignored the argument I made back then[1], and which I reiterated in this thread. So I'll say it one more time: the more compelling reason is not the #ifdefs, but the fact that the older versions are totally untested. In fact, they do not even compile, and yet I have not seen any patches to fix that. So IMHO this is about being honest with users about which versions we _actually_ support. -Peff [1] https://public-inbox.org/git/20170410182215.figy7hm4sogwipyz@sigill.intra.peff.net/