Re: Libification project (SoC)
- From
- Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino <lcapitulino@mandriva.com.br>
- Date
- Mar 16, 2007, 13:47 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20070316104715.483df0d5@localhost>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vejnpycu1.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
Em Thu, 15 Mar 2007 22:30:46 -0700 Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> escreveu:
| "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@spearce.org> writes: | | >> o Documentation (eg, doxygen) | >> o Unit-tests | >> o Add prefix (eg, git_*) to public API functions | > | > Yes. But which functions shall we expose? ;-) | | Before going into that topic, a bigger question is if we are | happy with the current internal API and what the goal of | libification is. If the libification is going to say that "this | is a published API so we are not going to change it", I would | imagine that it would be very hard to accept in the mainline.
I think you can put this way: do you want/whish to make git more useful than it's today?
If so, such a library is important because it will allow users to write application that use git in a reasonable way.
It doesn't need to be the next five-zilion-function-library that will provide the wonders of git in several different ways.
We could start by fixing the got-an-error-die behaivor and define a _experimental_ API (just a few functions) just to get data out of git.
This would be enough to write the Perl binding I think?
-- Luiz Fernando N. Capitulino