git perl-less build?

[Peter Robinson]

Hi,

> I have this request on bugzilla [0] for perl-less build of git due to large
> dependency on Perl modules, which is unwanted for atomic.

There's actually a number of other usecases where having git without
pulling in perl would be very useful, it's been on my todo list to
investigate but not got to the top yet.

> I am not sure that's good idea.
> With this change we will create places for error messages about missing perl
> modules and that's something what we don't want.
>
> E.g. missing git-add--interactive will bring one unusable option which will
> cause error message like this. I have two other bugs where I solve similar
> troubles. Separate whole git-add doesn't make sense. So if this is good
> trade off approved by others, OK, we can do that, with notice that some
> error messages can appear.

I think git add should be in the base package so splitting out
--interactive would be useful. Could we work with upstream to get
"git-add--interactive" re-implemented in the language that the rest of
core git is implemented in so we don't have to drop the functionality
while removing the base dep on perl?

> I don't know if git-add--interactive is single weak place of this split or
> there are others yet, but it is only one which I see know.

I think it would be useful to do a review to work out exactly what
functionality is lost by moving the perl deps to a subpackage.

> Can you give me some opinions about this? If it's OK, it can be done for
> F23.

I would love to see this in F-23.

Peter