From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Catalin Marinas Subject: Re: Barebone Porcelain. Where to stop? Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2005 11:22:33 +0100 Message-ID: References: <7vek9yirdi.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <42DB32F1.5020900@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jul 18 12:24:16 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DuSml-0005Ls-Ht for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 18 Jul 2005 12:23:43 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261597AbVGRKX3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2005 06:23:29 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261298AbVGRKX3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2005 06:23:29 -0400 Received: from cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com ([193.131.176.58]:41143 "EHLO cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261602AbVGRKXT (ORCPT ); Mon, 18 Jul 2005 06:23:19 -0400 Received: from cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com (cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com [10.1.127.39]) by cam-admin0.cambridge.arm.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j6IAMMs4007146; Mon, 18 Jul 2005 11:22:22 +0100 (BST) Received: from ZIPPY.Emea.Arm.com (cam-exch1.emea.arm.com [10.1.255.57]) by cam-mail2.cambridge.arm.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA08483; Mon, 18 Jul 2005 11:23:00 +0100 (BST) Received: from localhost.localdomain ([10.1.69.144]) by ZIPPY.Emea.Arm.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Mon, 18 Jul 2005 11:22:59 +0100 To: Bryan Larsen In-Reply-To: <42DB32F1.5020900@gmail.com> (Bryan Larsen's message of "Mon, 18 Jul 2005 00:41:21 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1007 (Gnus v5.10.7) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Jul 2005 10:22:59.0356 (UTC) FILETIME=[ABC215C0:01C58B82] Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Bryan Larsen wrote: > Any lack of porcelain momentum is probably due to git having better > documentation than the current porcelains, such as cogito and stacked > git. The documentation, like tutorial.txt and Jeff Garzik's git > kernel howto give the impression that most kernel folks use git > instead of cogito. > > I personally think that the cogito interface and stacked git > interfaces are much nicer than git's, and would like to see these two > tools achieve some momentum. I don't see git going towards stgit at all. Indeed, it gets closer to cogito but I still like cogito over plain git since it's easier to use (my goal, though, is to add pull/clone commands to stgit so that one doesn't need to rely on directly using other tools). I am aware that, probably, the biggest problem with stgit is the documentation (and also a lack of regression tests). I hope I will find some time soon to write a tutorial and improve the command line help. I will setup a wiki in the next few days so that others can easily fix/update the documentation. -- Catalin