Re: If you would write git from scratch now, what would you change?

From: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
Date: Nov 26, 2007, 20:35 UTC
Message-ID: <85prxwzqvn.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>
In-Reply-To: <20071126195750.GD25784@efreet.light.src>

Jan Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz> writes:

Show 13 quoted lines

> On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 20:34:25 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Nicolas Pitre <nico@cam.org> writes:
>> > On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, David Kastrup wrote:
>> >> Get rid of plumbing at the command line level.
>> >
>> > We can't get rid of plumbing.
>> 
>> What about "at the command line level" did you not understand?
>
> Which part of we neither can nor want did you not understant?
>
> The availability of plumbing is really big part of a reason why git is
> so good and has so many scripts and tool built on top of it.

Which is the reason I proposed making the plumbing available at a scripting level, not at the command line level.

The actual trend we are getting nowadays is locking the porcelaine, previously available as shell scripts, down into C code, _without_ making use of a reasonable plumbing layer suitable for any scripting at all.

So the git community at the same time praises shell scripting and simultanouesly replaces it without even using the available plumbing, _and_ claims that _both_, exclusive and incompatible approaches, are the perfect solution. At the same time. While fighting the shell portability fight continuously, on Unix as well as Windows.

I may have a big mouth, but swallowing all of this at once is beyond me.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum