[ITA] Git et al

Adam Dinwoodie adam@dinwoodie.org
Wed Jan 29 17:07:00 GMT 2014

On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 10:54:27AM -0600, Yaakov (Cygwin/X) wrote:
> On 2014-01-29 05:53, Adam Dinwoodie wrote:
> >Thinking about it, my build and packages take Yaakov's work over at
> >Cygwin Ports to split the Git packages (at the moment, git-cvs is part
> >of the main git package, for example, while my build separates it out).
> >I know there have been debates about this in the past; is there
> >currently any guideline about the best way to manage such package
> >splits?
> I'm not sure to what debates you are referring, but the point of the
> split was to provide correct dependencies while isolating those to
> the components that actually need them.  This was already done with
> the more obvious tcl-tk dependency of gitk and git-gui, but my
> packages took it a step further.  So, for example, git-svn actually
> requires subversion-perl, but subversion is not small and not all
> git users are going to want that just in order to use git.

I seem to recall there being some discussion (I can't remember the
specific cases) about whether it would be sensible to have, for at least
the first release after a split, all the new packages depending on the
thinned down base one.

As an example, someone using git-cvs currently would only have the git
package.  If we list git-cvs as a requirement for the new git package,
when they upgrade git they'll automatically get git-cvs and won't lose
any functionality.  The following update can lose the git-cvs
requirement, giving the full advantage of the separated packages.

I think this makes things a bit more user friendly, at least for folk
who need the separated-out packages and who update their Cygwin setup
frequently, at the expense of postponing a lot of the advantage of those
separated out packages.

More information about the Cygwin-apps mailing list