Core and Not-So Core

[Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>]

On 5/11/05, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2005-05-11 at 02:22 +1000, Jon Seymour wrote:
> > So, no, it's not a religious issue. If anything, it is being dogmatic
> > to insist that the sacred GIT repository structure only be manipulated
> > by 'C' tools blessed by the hands of Linus.
>
> Given the volatility of the structure -- at least the details if not the
> fundamentals -- it seems bizarre to want to reimplement it rather than
> just using the existing tools.

I did consider wrapping it - I really did. But after thinking about it
for a couple of weeks
I eventually came to the conclusion it would be a sub-optimal solution.

And I don't agree that the structure is volatile. The actual structure
of GIT repository has been rock-solid since Linus reversed the
compression-signature order. Yes, there has been the excellent delta
work that Nicholas has been working on, but a Java version doesn't
need to use that anymore than Linus himself does [ and last time I
checked (the mailing list), Linus was being rather conservative about
that ].

What _has_ been changing at a great rate recently is the behaviour of
the tooling layer.

So, if I want a stable foundation to build my stuff on, basing it on
the output of the C tools would be a huge mistake. No, I think it
would be far safer for me to build my tooling using assumptions that
have proven to be rock-solid over the last few weeks - the structure
of the GIT repository format itself.

>
> This is the same mentality which gives Eclipse a half-arsed SSH
> reimplementation which doesn't behave like normal SSH is configured to
> behave either, right?
>

David, I have nothing whatsoever to do with the Eclipse implementation
of SSH, so what exactly is your point? All Java programmers are
fundamentally brain-damaged? Grow up, please.

jon.
-- 
homepage: http://www.zeta.org.au/~jon/
blog: http://orwelliantremors.blogspot.com/