Re: [PATCH] Make gc a builtin.

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Mar 14, 2007, 12:19 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0703141314140.22628@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <7vps7caxjb.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Hi,

On Wed, 14 Mar 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 22 quoted lines

> Andy Parkins <andyparkins@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> > On Wednesday 2007 March 14 07:44, Theodore Tso wrote:
> >
> >> I agree with Junio; I think the scripts are much more readable and
> >> easier to understand; In fact, it would be nice if the script were
> >> preserved somewhere, perhaps as comments in the .c file.
> >
> > If only there were some tool that would keep collections of files as a 
> > snapshotted whole and allow us to browse the history of those snapshots in 
> > some sort of connected graph, with each snapshot being given some sort of 
> > unique ID.  Then we could simply refer to that unique ID when we wanted to 
> > tell someone about a particular historical instance.
> >
> > :-)
> 
> There is a difference between having a readily greppable and
> lessable copy handy to study at your own initiative, and being
> able to retrieve to review only after being told.
> 
> You could argue that we can all do that with git-grep and
> git-less ;-).

Not to forget git-checkout.

But I like the idea of contrib/examples/. Why not put more stuff there, instead of clinging onto scripts for core-git? The purpose of contrib/examples/ is to provide easy samples, and the purpose of core-git is _not_ to provide easy examples, but a consistent and portable set of programs.

Als, when reading Git's scripts, I often think

- wow, what a different style from my one, and
- would locking not be a nice thing?

But I guess that now that the King Penguin spoke, I no longer have to argue for more builtins, even if they are trivial. (Who knows, maybe we can ship _one_ program, which is then hard linked to git-*, soon?)

Ciao, Dscho