On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 8:20 PM, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Felipe Contreras > <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> As a rule, I don't see much value in writing a framework that works >> only for one case, that smells more like over-engineering. If we had >> two cases (hg and bzr), then we might be able to know with a modicum >> of certainty what such a framework should have. So I would prefer to >> have two standalone remote-helpers, and _then_ do a framework to >> simplify both, but not before. But that's my personal opinion. >> >> Now that I have free time, I might be able to spend time writing such >> a proof-of-concept remote-bzr, and a simple framework. But I would be >> concentrated on remote-hg. > > Actually, there's no point in that; there's already a git-remote-bzr: > > http://bazaar.launchpad.net/~bzr-git/bzr-git/trunk/view/head:/git-remote-bzr Turns out the quality of that tools is not that great, so I decided to write a simple one using bzr-fastimport. It works nicely, although I wouldn't trust the quality of bzr-fastimport too much. It's so simple I don't see the need of a framework, but if needed, one could be done taking these git-remote-{hg,bzr} as a basis. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html