Re: [PATCH v2] Revert "doc: move git-cherry to plumbing"

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jan 14, 2025, 17:35 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqwmex47ub.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <b0a3889a-9d7f-4663-bb00-b1b457931fcb@app.fastmail.com>

"Kristoffer Haugsbakk" <kristofferhaugsbakk@fastmail.com> writes:

Show 15 quoted lines

> On Mon, Jan 13, 2025, at 17:56, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> It is not like it is a crime to intarctively make use of a plumbing
>> command, or we intentionally try to hide plumbing command from them
>> by making it deliberately less accessible.  "git cat-file commit X"
>> may be handier than "git show -s X" for some people and that is not
>> to be frowned upon.
>>
>> And what you call "might only be" is really the crucial thing to
>> consider.  If we want to keep a tool's output stable and machine
>> readable, we need to mark it as "meant for Porcelain writers", and
>> classifying the tool as plumbing is a pretty much established way to
>> do so.
>
> Okay.  I understand now.

I forgot to mention one thing worth addressing in your message, though. Making the tool more discoverable. It is a valuable consideration.

But I somehow think moving a tool between plumbing and Porcelain boundary is not the way to do so.

There is a collection of "howto" articles in Documentation/howto/ that is meant to be the place to learn how to go from workflow and objective to tools. If you have a success story that your use of "git cherry" helped greatly what you wanted to achieve, it may be a good place to share it.

Thanks.