From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 21:42:06 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH v2 0/4] A new library for plumbing output
Message-ID: <201004142342.06873.jnareb@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <m2xfabb9a1e1004141213t7d4f084bk72a3b72544e11542@mail.gmail.com>

Dnia środa 14. kwietnia 2010 21:13, Sverre Rabbelier napisał:
> Heya,
> 
> On Wed, Apr 14, 2010 at 21:10, Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I don't think it is needed for either command.
> 
> Those were just the first two plumbing commands that came to mind that
> I use myself, do you have any suggestions for others that would be
> more appropriate?

"git config [<type>] --get <name>" and friends... especially that even
in the case of '{ name: "<name>"; value: <value> }' (and without e.g.
"type: <type>" field) we can have <value> of correct JSON type.

"git ls-files" (especially when mixing information about files in
working area and those in index), "git diff-tree" (especially for merges,
as ordinary columnar output do not include all possible information,
like pre-image filename in case of renames), perhaps "git branch" so
people stop trying to parse it in scripts, perhaps "git describe"
(you need "git describe --long" to unambiguously parse its output),
perhaps "git remote show" (I am not sure about this case), "git show-ref"
if "git for-each-ref" didn't exists...

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland