From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: GIT on MinGW problem Date: Sat, 26 May 2007 23:45:41 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <1dbc01c79432$b4400a80$0200a8c0@AMD2500> <464534EE.30904@xs4all.nl> <4656A304.AF39A0B6@eudaptics.com> <7v4plzi508.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Han-Wen Nienhuys , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun May 27 00:46:02 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Hs51K-0007Mm-MO for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sun, 27 May 2007 00:45:59 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1750916AbXEZWpv (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 May 2007 18:45:51 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1750902AbXEZWpv (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 May 2007 18:45:51 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:52708 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750836AbXEZWpu (ORCPT ); Sat, 26 May 2007 18:45:50 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 26 May 2007 22:45:47 -0000 Received: from wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de (EHLO localhost) [132.187.25.13] by mail.gmx.net (mp057) with SMTP; 27 May 2007 00:45:47 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1//joVudoH/LruB/Jyx0Hzz9ZaMUXhoyJd7WvakkC KS161FUOAT1pfT X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <7v4plzi508.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Sat, 26 May 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > >> In this, part of the pain is that Git tries to guess the version number > >> by itself in a complicated way. > > > > Yes, I never understood that myself why it has to be so complicated. But > > then, it did not make _my_ life hard, so I did not care. > > "echo "MyVersionNumber" >version && make"? Good to know! > > OTOH, it _is_ a nice thing to protohype the new commands as shell or perl > > scripts. When they stabilize enough, convert them to builtins. > > Protohype is a nice word. Throw out a half-working stuff and > advertise it as the best thing since sliced bread even before it > starts to being useful ;-) It started out as a typo. But then I liked it so much that I kept it ;-) > > With add--interactive, I think it's better to leave it [...] > > I do not follow you here. You mentioned several times that you were unsure if add--interactive was a good idea. But I like it very much. > > > But remote will soon be the center of my crosshairs. > > I am afraid that it might be a bit premature. > > I've been hoping that we can make git-clone a thin wrapper > around init/remote/fetch/checkout. For one thing, we would want > to split the separate-remotes layout and bareness to create > "mirror" (I called it "pure" previously, but this is really a > mirror) layout for git-clone, among other things, and that kind > of enhancements would need to be done inside git-remote. Fair enough. Ciao, Dscho