I’d like to see it go away. For better and for worse, git is feature rich and that makes maintaining a wrapper script difficult. Personally speaking, I had to fix a git-llvm bug recently because it made flimsy assumptions about git remote names and how upstream tracking repositories work.
> On Oct 15, 2019, at 10:47 AM, Marcus Johnson via llvm-dev > <llvm-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote: > > I say retire it instantly. > >> On Oct 15, 2019, at 3:14 AM, Tom Stellard via cfe-dev >> <cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> I mentioned this in my email last week, but I wanted to start a new >> thread to get everyone's input on what to do about the git-llvm script >> after the GitHub migration. >> >> The original plan was to require the use of the git-llvm script when >> committing to GitHub even after the migration was complete. >> The reason we decided to do this was so that we could prevent developers >> from accidentally pushing merge commits and making the history non-linear. >> >> Just in the last week, the GitHub team completed the "Require Linear >> History" branch protection, which means we can now enforce linear >> history server side and do not need the git-llvm script to do this. >> >> With this new development, the question I have is when should the >> git-llvm script become optional? Should we make it optional immediately, >> so that developers can push directly using vanilla git from day 1, or should >> we >> wait a few weeks/months until things have stabilized to make it optional? >> >> Thanks, >> Tom >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> cfe-dev mailing list >> cfe-...@lists.llvm.org >> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cfe-dev > _______________________________________________ > LLVM Developers mailing list > llvm-...@lists.llvm.org > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev _______________________________________________ lldb-dev mailing list lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lldb-dev
