From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ron Garret Subject: Re: My use case Date: Sat, 30 Jan 2010 11:19:45 -0800 Organization: Amalgamated Widgets Message-ID: References: <1264840729-sup-5264@ezyang> <20100130174844.GD788@thunk.org> <7vtyu3o1hq.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Jan 30 20:21:25 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NbIsi-00039N-Vt for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:21:21 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754457Ab0A3TVP (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:21:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754481Ab0A3TVO (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:21:14 -0500 Received: from lo.gmane.org ([80.91.229.12]:51831 "EHLO lo.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754441Ab0A3TVJ (ORCPT ); Sat, 30 Jan 2010 14:21:09 -0500 Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NbIs5-0002PE-Ts for git@vger.kernel.org; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:20:41 +0100 Received: from 68-190-211-184.dhcp.gldl.ca.charter.com ([68.190.211.184]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:20:41 +0100 Received: from ron1 by 68-190-211-184.dhcp.gldl.ca.charter.com with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sat, 30 Jan 2010 20:20:41 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 68-190-211-184.dhcp.gldl.ca.charter.com User-Agent: MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.1 (Intel Mac OS X) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: In article <7vtyu3o1hq.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Ron Garret writes: > > > You are absolutely right. That is another reason why having the > > individual files tracked separately from the main project would be a > > good thing if I can get it to work. (It would be kind of like having a > > git-stash on a per-file basis.) > > When you have more than one functions defined in a file, and the > interactive Lisp development cycle works primarily on s-exp basis, not > necessarily constrained by file boundaries, don't you want even finer > grained control than "stash per-file"? > > I don't think of a good solution myself, but I find your "finer than whole > tree" an interesting topic. You're reading my mind. My long-term vision for this thing is indeed a revision control system based on S-expressions, not files. (I personally think the whole concept of files is fundamentally broken, but that's a whole 'nuther kettle of lobster.) Unfortunately, that opens up a Pandora's box of ancillary issues, which would be seriously off-topic here. If you're interested we can talk about it off-line (or we can do it here if you think it's not too much of a tangent). rg