From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 21:16:18 GMT
Subject: Re: VCS comparison table
Message-ID: <20061025211618.GA30121@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <7v3b9cnlx7.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

On Wed, Oct 25, 2006 at 02:08:20PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> the older shell implementation around as reference.  People
> coming to git after 1.3 series certainly do have harder time to
> learn how plumbing would fit together than when git old-timers
> learned it, if that is the area they are interested in, as
> opposed to just using git as a revision tracking system.

I think this is part of the complication of discussion I'm having with
David. There are really two sets of users for git: people who want to
hack scripts based on plumbing, and people who want everything to "just
work." I think it's a good point that as the system matures (movement
to C and growth of complexity), it might become less easy to hack.

>  - Create examples/ hierarchy in the source tree to house these
>    historical implementations as a reference material, or an
>    entirely different branch or repository to house them.

Housing historical implementations seems like it would just lead to
out-of-date and non-functional examples.

>  - Learn the itches David and other people have, that the
>    current git Porcelain-ish does not scratch well, and enrich
>    Documentation/technical with real-world working scripts built
>    around plumbing.

I think this is a better approach. I think it also makes sense to
let people know that it's an acceptable approach to start new features
as shell and then have them mature to C (looking at the current
codebase, and some of Dscho's rantings, one might get the impression
that git isn't accepting new shell scripts).