Re: [PATCH] Make "git reset" a builtin. (incomplete)

[Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>]

Hi,

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Reece Dunn wrote:

> On 22/08/07, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> >
> > > On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, David Kastrup wrote:
> > >
> > > > If the scripting engine of choice for cobbling together prototypes
> > > > remains the Unix toolchain outside of git proper, then Windows users
> > > > will _always_ remain second class citizens since they will get to work
> > > > with and on new porcelain much later than the rest of the world:
> > > > namely when somebody bothers porting his new favorite tool for them to
> > > > C.
> > >
> > > Right.
> >
> > And not making the scripts builtins helps Windows users how, exactly?
> 
> IIUC, the plumbing is all (or mostly) ported to C code, whereas the
> remaining scripts are on the porcelain side.

Well, I know.  And guess three times why _I_ know.

> Given that you have to deal with other Windows issues (line ending,
> case insensitive file names, path format), why not put the current
> scripts in a posix porcelain directory and have a Windows porcelain
> directory where the Windows porcelain is written in C#?

Isn't C# yet another dependency?  Worse yet, a dependency that you plan to 
have on _one_ platform, and that is utterly unusable on other platforms?  
And don't give me the Mono talk.  I happen to be _very_ unhappy with the 
Mono dependency that SuSE introduced, because it is _slow_ _as_ _magma_.

> Alternatively, the porcelain could be unified to use Python and compiled 
> into an executable that is installed on the Windows platform (removing 
> the need to have anything other than git installed to use it).

Mentioning Python in this context is not even funny.

> This way, both camps (posix and Windows) will be happy.

No.  I would be _very_ unhappy should your plans come true.

Ciao,
Dscho