From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Frank Sorenson Subject: Re: Barebone Porcelain. Where to stop? Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 14:57:41 -0600 Message-ID: <42DC17C5.80000@tuxrocks.com> References: <7vek9yirdi.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <42DB32F1.5020900@gmail.com> <7v8y04q6sj.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Catalin Marinas , Bryan Larsen , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jul 18 22:59:06 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Ducgq-0006mO-J3 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 18 Jul 2005 22:58:16 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261893AbVGRU6J (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2005 16:58:09 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261895AbVGRU6J (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2005 16:58:09 -0400 Received: from www.tuxrocks.com ([64.62.190.123]:37389 "EHLO tuxrocks.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261893AbVGRU6I (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2005 16:58:08 -0400 Received: from [128.187.171.102] (obelix.cs.byu.edu [128.187.171.102]) (authenticated bits=0) by tuxrocks.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j6IKvfR7024296 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 18 Jul 2005 14:57:44 -0600 User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7v8y04q6sj.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.91.0.0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Junio C Hamano wrote: > Catalin Marinas writes: > >>I don't see git going towards stgit at all. Indeed, it gets closer to >>cogito but I still like cogito over plain git since it's easier to use >>(my goal, though, is to add pull/clone commands to stgit so that one >>doesn't need to rely on directly using other tools). > > All good to hear. I do not speak for Linus, but I think core > should not be competing with Porcelain. To me, there are four > purposes for the barebone Porcelain layer: > > (1) provide the end user a minimum UI to do essential things. > > (2) codify the BCP/convention to use the core by higher level > SCMs to help them stay compatible with each other where > possible (e.g. "what .git/HEAD means, when it gets updated, > and to what" was discussed recently). > > (3) serve as an example for people interested in learning the > core GIT (i.e. they may be starting their own Porcelain). > > (4) implement operations that are heavy on logic/convention but > does not have much UI need so that higher level SCMs can > implement their own UI by just being a thin wrapper around > them (e.g. clone/fetch and push). These all sound good. Along the lines of #4, one potential purpose I've been curious about is the possibility of pulling these core operations out into a library that Porcelain could use directly. This way, Porcelain, including the minimum git UI (your #1), could directly link in and call the needed functions, and rather than stringing sequences of git-whatever commands together in a shell script. This would allow Porcelain to take advantage of the core git more directly, and would improve the speed of Porcelain. The minimum UI (#1) would be a much simpler example (#3), since it would only be the front-end, rather than the front-end/back-end combination it is now. Is this something we want to consider, or am I out in left field? :) Frank - -- Frank Sorenson - KD7TZK Systems Manager, Computer Science Department Brigham Young University frank@tuxrocks.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFC3BfFaI0dwg4A47wRApyQAKD3yXqYfcm7TgJ5GnIZsw5ZcB+P/wCgpM75 cjPHXi8jd0VthQjKNFITFxU= =Jxx/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----