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=-2.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID shortcircuit=no autolearn=no 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 75716201A7 for ; Tue, 16 May 2017 00:37:59 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750858AbdEPAh5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 May 2017 20:37:57 -0400 Received: from mail-pf0-f196.google.com ([209.85.192.196]:34894 "EHLO mail-pf0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750710AbdEPAh4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 15 May 2017 20:37:56 -0400 Received: by mail-pf0-f196.google.com with SMTP id u26so17738890pfd.2 for ; Mon, 15 May 2017 17:37:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:message-id:user-agent :mime-version; bh=dCNlDJX+6Krf0WspGB+iXZxv4C9d9oPIrJXJ4WTQik0=; b=a6lcNro5aD3Vts1ny3k9WxmdjyEaDr3LAkPgCzV+O9cxI1uHxgNp2BFQBqEJjo/iBV 7dzn/MpDdvniEvOvcHthNPtdBFnm1AyPrUBZKXEfuawnMgDopwz2GCt/2dWCUDLsy31e oxrKCUt7eCgiEmAuNU/d0vZUGYD+BzejghAf0LNiwAfdQuzxt7+eqIcHfs+QTXqGd26K CJR39OQ7UpJq1AOnDQ8lC0zHGFCZ7Ya4XOGEfit2dK2G75yUQlZtY74Kv37mMPtLw0c4 HgDRm8tQ66Jb9gX11PrbOcx5CR/ytEwOYxJnoKpCUz4dpeDK29xrjoFfWpSTLF3FwZ5h VFQg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=dCNlDJX+6Krf0WspGB+iXZxv4C9d9oPIrJXJ4WTQik0=; b=DISobWGr73QkxFu3TrHvkJCAJHrMVHii3+lzDf4cXzGd7+4J4nYbLU7niYIkWQZxYD zb0HJEOPq8PqfQk2VVnpNKnv8rjeGIEjy07TIXnj5IMC0RDgXHKKh9+K/91rbNbEJIyl iszeF6N0lcwHrP2dmZzEB+qH6VGsd9kKr0Xepdh8QmTgup/gIs7pgfa/rZQpVxXDNuUc WkF0GhAbFRB7et/gKK+Q1cuEgWPuFaW3XBvIXBmnYrI0jrYkp/V4oyOvP367eU0sOPcs i1Y8EozQ404438MkxI7vIFygKAE/zNnpGAQ/90jYrprijpO4a5Zgx/aFQc3CWFhmzSHN buGg== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcBq5oK0A4JxS4LO2yI9X0KLbBWKRkfZKdnt6I1MHsRNQ9A6xGXJ hoBW0x8AOlRvwA== X-Received: by 10.99.125.11 with SMTP id y11mr9122659pgc.5.1494895075398; Mon, 15 May 2017 17:37:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost ([2620:0:1000:8622:8dc7:ff72:325b:10d7]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x4sm23344926pgc.65.2017.05.15.17.37.54 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 15 May 2017 17:37:54 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Johannes Schindelin Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] Start retiring .git/remotes/ and .git/branches/ for good References: Date: Tue, 16 May 2017 09:37:54 +0900 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Johannes Schindelin writes: > On Fri, 12 May 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Is it really hurting us having to support these old information >> sources we treat as read-only? > > Well, you frequently complain about my patches, claiming that they place > unnecessary maintenance burden on you. > > I would say that the .git/remotes/ and .git/branches/ code is a lot more > maintenance burden than most of my patches. I wasn't going to respond to this thread anymore, because I didn't feel like the discussion was going anywhere, and you already said you won't listen to me. You seem to be confused between "maintenance burden" and "burden on the maintainer". I felt that it needs to be corrected for other people reading this exchange from the sideline. When we worked to add feature X in the remotes subsystem, we were slowed down because we had to adjust the code also for .git/branches. The same story for feature Y. The same for feature Z. This is getting ridiculous/cumbersome, especially given that we know .git/branches is not used by anybody. That's a maintenance burden, and the "we" refers to the Git development community as a whole, not the maintainer. It is not a burden on _me_. Also important to notice is I do not know what X, Y and Z are with respect to .git/branches feature. That is where "Is it really hurting?" question comes from, but it hasn't been answered so far. What's burden on the maintainer is having to engage in a discussion like this one, to reject an attempt to remove something that is not demonstratably a maintenance burden, because the maintainer has to act as the last-resort champion for the end-users, when others on the list do not speak up X-<. Yes, I know that proving that something we currently support is not used by anybody is HARD [*1*]. That is why removal is costly. And that in turn is why we need to be careful when adding new things and making changes in general. [Footnotes] *1* Removal of "rsync" transport we did recently was a happy but rare case. It has been broken for a few years without anybody complaining.