Re: [Vcs-fast-import-devs] What's cooking in git.git (Oct 2009, #01; Wed, 07)
- From
Matt McClure <mlm@aya.yale.edu>
- Date
- Oct 11, 2009, 11:40 UTC
- Message-ID
- <e48c5e540910110440k33e3d0dcp6d8c1480b5848366@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <fabb9a1e0910081058m59527600o392a6b438b18512e@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 19 quoted lines
> On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 19:39, Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org> wrote: >> Other options that are clearly git should be declared as: >> >> option git max-pack-size=2048 >> >> with the meaning of option being declared something like: >> >> If the parsing VCS name appears as the first argument, the parsing >> VCS must recognize and support the supplied option, and if not >> recognized or not supported must abort parsing altogether. >> >> If the parsing VCS name is not the first argument, it must entirely >> ignore the option command and not try to process its contents. > > I think it makes to ignore options that are not for our vcs, as long > as options that change import behavior (such as marks, date-format) > are combined with, say, 'feature tool=git'. This way we can be sure > that when outputting out a vcs specific stream, it is only parsed by > that vcs.
I prefer option-scope VCS specifiers over stream-scope specifiers. The latter would artificially reduce interoperability between VCSs. Who is the fast-output developer to say that only one fast-import tool should use his stream?
-- Matt http://www.google.com/profiles/matthewlmcclure