Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/13] remote-hg: general updates

From: Jed Brown <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 04 Apr 2013 14:23:01 -0500

Junio C Hamano <[email-masked]> writes:

> So,... is there a concrete proposal for _me_ to act on?  Do you want
> to see contrib/remtote-hg out of my tree, and have it compete with
> the other one (which also shouldn't be in my tree) in the open?

Three months ago, I would have said yes.  Now I don't know.  It looks
like remote-hg has improved and is perhaps stable enough to remain, but
I think it needs a much more complete test suite [1] and some visible
documentation about its mapping semantics.  There is no way a change
like "force-push by default" should come without the user knowing about
it.  (I don't think force-push should become the default in any case,
but something is wrong with the process if there isn't a good way to
communicate such behavioral turmoil.)  A separate project making its own
releases has a more visible place to indicate such changes.

[1] Max and I have no love for the "obfuscated shell scripting" in
gitifyhg's 'py.test'- and 'sh'-based test suite, and we expressed early
on that we'd rather have git-style shell scripts.  So while porting
these would provide a good start, they can't just be dropped into
git.git.