From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation/git.txt: command re-classification Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 14:22:17 -0800 Message-ID: <7vbqkufyhy.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <7v1wlrle61.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jan 19 23:22:24 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H827p-00054u-T5 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 23:22:22 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964899AbXASWWT (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jan 2007 17:22:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964942AbXASWWT (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jan 2007 17:22:19 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao08.cox.net ([68.230.241.31]:54585 "EHLO fed1rmmtao08.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964899AbXASWWS (ORCPT ); Fri, 19 Jan 2007 17:22:18 -0500 Received: from fed1rmimpo02.cox.net ([70.169.32.72]) by fed1rmmtao08.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.03 201-2131-130-104-20060516) with ESMTP id <20070119222218.WZZH16632.fed1rmmtao08.cox.net@fed1rmimpo02.cox.net>; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 17:22:18 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo02.cox.net with bizsmtp id DANb1W0021kojtg0000000; Fri, 19 Jan 2007 17:22:35 -0500 To: Nicolas Pitre In-Reply-To: (Nicolas Pitre's message of "Fri, 19 Jan 2007 17:08:53 -0500 (EST)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Nicolas Pitre writes: > OK. But I think the following are still misclassified: > > git-rev-parse > git-runstatus > git-fsck-objects Thanks for proofreading. runstatus should be a pure helper. I am not sure what rev-parse and fsck-objects are, but they are not primary porcelain. rev-parse could sit next to rev-list and fsck-objects, I guess. >> +The interface (input, output, set of options and the semantics) >> +to these low-level commands are meant to be a lot more stable >> +than Porcelain level commands, because these commands are >> +primarily for scripted use. To put it another way, the >> +interface to Plumbing commands are subject to change in order to >> +improve the end user experience. > > I think the "to put it another way" sentence is a bit confusing here. I agree. What I wanted to say was the interface to plumbing is sacred and we will not lightly change it without a very good reason, while Porcelains are more or less "for breaking". Better wording is certainly appreciated.