From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [RFC/WIP PATCH 1/3] teach config parsing to read from strbuf Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:55:53 -0500 Message-ID: <20130226045552.GA31331@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <6c69068b4e6a72a2cca5dc6eaffa9982032a7f2a.1361751905.git.hvoigt@hvoigt.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, Jens Lehmann To: Heiko Voigt X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Feb 26 05:56:29 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UACaV-0002rH-HD for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 26 Feb 2013 05:56:23 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759491Ab3BZEz5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:55:57 -0500 Received: from 75-15-5-89.uvs.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([75.15.5.89]:60434 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756614Ab3BZEz4 (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:55:56 -0500 Received: (qmail 3788 invoked by uid 107); 26 Feb 2013 04:57:30 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:57:30 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 25 Feb 2013 23:55:53 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <6c69068b4e6a72a2cca5dc6eaffa9982032a7f2a.1361751905.git.hvoigt@hvoigt.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 02:04:18AM +0100, Heiko Voigt wrote: > This can be used to read configuration values directly from gits > database. > > Signed-off-by: Heiko Voigt FWIW, I implemented something quite similar as a 2-patch series here: http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/189142 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/189143 but they were never merged as we ended up throwing out the feature built on top (including config from blobs). I didn't look too closely at your implementation, but it looks like you touched the same spots in the same way. Which is probably a good thing, and may give another data point for Junio's "what would it look like to read another source" comment. -Peff