From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.176.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: If I were redoing git from scratch... Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 13:21:57 +0100 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <7vpsc3xx65.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2006 12:22:30 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 53 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-81-190-24-209.torun.mm.pl Mail-Copies-To: jnareb@gmail.com User-Agent: KNode/0.10.2 Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GgKXW-0005Wd-Ty for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sat, 04 Nov 2006 13:22:23 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965384AbWKDMWM (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Nov 2006 07:22:12 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965368AbWKDMWM (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Nov 2006 07:22:12 -0500 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:5779 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965384AbWKDMWL (ORCPT ); Sat, 4 Nov 2006 07:22:11 -0500 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1GgKX5-0005Pl-M9 for git@vger.kernel.org; Sat, 04 Nov 2006 13:21:55 +0100 Received: from host-81-190-24-209.torun.mm.pl ([81.190.24.209]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 04 Nov 2006 13:21:55 +0100 Received: from jnareb by host-81-190-24-209.torun.mm.pl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 04 Nov 2006 13:21:55 +0100 To: git@vger.kernel.org Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano wrote: > * Core data structure [...] > The biggest one is that we use too many static (worse, function > scope static) variables that live for the life of the process, > which makes many things very nice and easy ("run-once and let > exit clean up the mess" mentality), but because of this it > becomes awkward to do certain things. Examples are: One of examples that have been only rarely fixed was for_each_ref forcing callers to using static variable to store gathered data instead of passing the data as one of arguments. > * Fetch/Push/Pull/Merge confusion > > Everybody hates the fact that inverse of push is fetch not pull, > and merge is not a usual Porcelain (while it _is_ usable as a > regular UI command, it was originally done as a lower layer > helper to "pull" Porcelain and has a strange parameter order > with seemingly useless HEAD parameter in the middle). > > If I were doing git from scratch, I would probably avoid any of > the above words that have loaded meanings from other SCMs. I'm a bit used to "push", "fetch" and "pull". I consider "pull" a bit of artifact from times of one branch per repository layout. The fact that "pull" fetches _all_ the branches but merges one [usually] with the _current_ branch (unless you configure it other way)... I'll leave "push" as is, leave "fetch" as is, and make "pull" to be "fetch" by default unless you use "--merge[=]" option. I'd rename "merge" to "merge-driver" and make new "merge" thanks to new users wouldn't have to learn to use "git pull . branchA" to merge current branch with branchA. Perhaps would make it possible to specify remote branch a la cogito, #, to pull remote branch without tracking branch, and for symmetry have "--pull[=]" or "--fetch[=]" option. > * Unified "fetch" and "push" across backends. > Very nice idea, but one must remember the limitations of import/export tools and of course limitations of other SCM... well, and also limitations of Git, if there are any compared to other SCM ;-) -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git