From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sean Subject: Re: Unresolved issues #2 Date: Sat, 6 May 2006 11:35:49 -0400 Message-ID: References: <7v64lcqz9j.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7v4q065hq0.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <7vhd43vgnm.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: junkio@cox.net, barkalow@iabervon.org, git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat May 06 17:41:13 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 1FcOu5-0002sr-Ae for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sat, 06 May 2006 17:41:09 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750887AbWEFPkt (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 May 2006 11:40:49 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750892AbWEFPkt (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 May 2006 11:40:49 -0400 Received: from bayc1-pasmtp10.bayc1.hotmail.com ([65.54.191.170]:39001 "EHLO BAYC1-PASMTP10.BAYC1.HOTMAIL.COM") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750872AbWEFPkt (ORCPT ); Sat, 6 May 2006 11:40:49 -0400 X-Originating-IP: [69.156.138.66] X-Originating-Email: [seanlkml@sympatico.ca] Received: from linux1.attic.local ([69.156.138.66]) by BAYC1-PASMTP10.BAYC1.HOTMAIL.COM over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sat, 6 May 2006 08:42:40 -0700 Received: from guru.attic.local (guru.attic.local [10.10.10.28]) by linux1.attic.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4FAE1644C28; Sat, 6 May 2006 11:40:47 -0400 (EDT) To: Linus Torvalds Message-Id: <20060506113549.48e553d1.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.0.4 (GTK+ 2.8.15; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 06 May 2006 15:42:40.0750 (UTC) FILETIME=[B56188E0:01C67123] Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 6 May 2006 08:26:36 -0700 (PDT) Linus Torvalds wrote: > I _personally_ care about the semantics, but not very deeply - since I > tend to actually have just one main branch, and a couple of throw-away > ones if I ended up working on something. > > But I think that for this thing to become useful, we want to care about > the format - or at least the interface to the different users (with the > acknowledgement that "users" should often be porcelain above us). > > Right now we've basically had people hand-editing the remotes files, and I > think cogito still uses the older branches format that came from cogito in > the first place. I think we should just try to decide on a config file > format, and make it easy for cogito etc to use it. Linus, Wondering why you feel so strongly that most "users" shouldn't be real people. What is wrong with continuing to make git easier for developers to use without needing any extra software? Sean