From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Rast Subject: Re: [GSoC] Designing a faster index format - Progress Report week 8 Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2012 15:39:45 +0200 Message-ID: <878vfo1you.fsf@thomas.inf.ethz.ch> References: <20120611205312.GB18686@tgummerer> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Cc: , , , To: Thomas Gummerer X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jun 15 15:40:01 2012 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 1SfWki-0004Aw-Vz for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 15:39:53 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754693Ab2FONjt (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2012 09:39:49 -0400 Received: from edge10.ethz.ch ([82.130.75.186]:14368 "EHLO edge10.ethz.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751151Ab2FONjs (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jun 2012 09:39:48 -0400 Received: from CAS22.d.ethz.ch (172.31.51.112) by edge10.ethz.ch (82.130.75.186) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.298.4; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 15:39:45 +0200 Received: from thomas.inf.ethz.ch.ethz.ch (129.132.153.233) by CAS22.d.ethz.ch (172.31.51.112) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.2.298.4; Fri, 15 Jun 2012 15:39:45 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20120611205312.GB18686@tgummerer> (Thomas Gummerer's message of "Mon, 11 Jun 2012 22:53:12 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) X-Originating-IP: [129.132.153.233] Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Thomas Gummerer writes: > == Outlook for the next week == > > - Continue implementing the API as discussed on [5]. > > [5] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/198283/focus=198474 Sorry for being rather slow this week! I still intend to do another review of the github code RSN, however I felt I should point out some more IRC conclusions to the list. I talked Thomas out of going forward with the API as the next step, and instead work towards having a writer side for the current format. This should have some benefits: * The code becomes more easily testable, and hopefully able to run the test suite. * Spelling the writer in code should shake down any unforeseen deficiencies of the format. Until update-index or similar learn to use the partial writing facilities, we should have a little extra tool here that allows poking at a single entry for testing. * The API will need to have an updating and a writing side, and what that should look like will become clearer. That does mean that the API-demo in git-ls-files (suggested by Duy) will likely have to wait until after midterms. -- Thomas Rast trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch