From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add a Documentation/git-tools.txt Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2006 02:59:12 -0800 Message-ID: <7vlkw7iphb.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, junkio@cox.net X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Feb 19 11:59:25 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FAmHi-0001B4-2U for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 19 Feb 2006 11:59:22 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932293AbWBSK7P (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Feb 2006 05:59:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932314AbWBSK7P (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Feb 2006 05:59:15 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao08.cox.net ([68.230.241.31]:663 "EHLO fed1rmmtao08.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932293AbWBSK7O (ORCPT ); Sun, 19 Feb 2006 05:59:14 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao08.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.05.02 201-2131-123-102-20050715) with ESMTP id <20060219105626.FBCA26964.fed1rmmtao08.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Sun, 19 Feb 2006 05:56:26 -0500 To: "Marco Costalba" In-Reply-To: (Marco Costalba's message of "Sun, 19 Feb 2006 11:00:31 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Marco Costalba" writes: > A brief survey of useful git tools, including third-party > and external projects. > > Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba > --- > > Please consider this more of a RFC then a finished patch. > > Where possible, for each tool, the author's description is used as a summary. > I found http://git.or.cz/ a good source. Thanks for starting this. Briefly mentioning tool's strength and weakness without being too subjective would be very helpful to potential users. We would encourage competition without making other tools sound inferiour on subjective terms. So "this is similar to foobar tool, but runs much faster, but has these limitations" would be a good style, but "this draws much nicer picture than barboz" without substantiating why it is nicer may be suboptimal. Also I am a bit afraid that the summary can become stale unless maintained actively. Hopefully the respective authors of tools can keep us updated. I am of two minds about mentioning things available from the git repository, but I think it makes the survey more complete and more useful in general to include them in the list. The private draft I sent out to you earlier forgot to include the foreign SCM interfaces.