I have changed my proposal according to the comments by Hariom Verma. Improvement vs v1: 1. Put more effort into related work and grasp a lot from them. 2. More details about timeline. 3. More details about my plan. 4. Some tiny changes in other content. Open to more guidances. Thanks for suggestions. * Unify ref-filter formats with other pretty formats * Personal Information Full name: Zhang Yi E-mail: 18994118902@xxxxxxx Tel: (+86)18994118902 Education: Wuhan University of Technology (China) Major: Computer engineering Year: First-year postgraduate student Github: https://github.com/zhanyi22333 * Synopsis ** Motivation Git has different implements to format command output, which makes chaos and hinder improvement of code quality. Aim to unify the different implementations to format output for different commands, we want to transform pretty into ref-filter formatting logic. According to the present situation, I need to add more ref-filter atoms to replace pretty. ** Previous Work - `git for-each-ref`, `git branch` and `git tag` formats into the ref-filter formats: done by Karthik Nayak (GSoC 2015) - `git cat-file` formats and the ref-filter formats: started by Olga Telezhnaya (Outreachy 2017-2018), continued by ZheNing Hu (GSoC 2021), There are a lot of patches which are concluded in his final blog [1] but still not finished due to tricky performance issues - ref-filter formats and pretty formats: started by Hariom Verma (GSoC 2020) There are also a lot of patches which are concluded in his final blog [2] continued a bit by Jaydeep Das (GSoC 2022) Patch: gpg-interface: add function for converting trust level to string [3] and continued by Nsengiyumva Wilberforce and his work on the "signature" atoms should be mostly over when the GSoC starts. (Outreachy 2022-2023) Patch: ref-filter: add new atom "signature" atom [4] ps: There seems no conclusion articles of Karthik Nayak's and Olga Telezhnava's works. ** What is left Since the work of "signature" atoms will be finished by Nsengiyumva Wilberforce, There may be some other atoms left for ref-filter formats and pretty formats. But I still need to check. If there is no work left for for ref-filter formats and pretty formats, then there may be another command which has a different format implement with ref-filter. ** Steps In my mind, there are 4 steps logically: 1. Check and find a pretty atom which has no substitute in ref-filter. This step is to decide the whole direction of the next work. Christian Couder informed me that I can do things like the following: - making sure that all the atoms in the pretty formats have similar atoms implemented in the ref-filter formats - find a way to convert any string containing pretty format atoms to a string containing only ref-filter format atoms - find a way to plug-in the ref-filter code into the pretty code, so that callers of the pretty code would not need to be changed much. 2. Add reasonable test scripts and maybe documents in advance. In my opinion, making a draft of test scripts and documents in advance can help me have a deep understanding of the behavior that I need to code. I learn this development mode from book. And I have really met problems rising from the misunderstanding of needed behavior which will result in a lot of reworks. 3. Change code. Inspired by Hariom Verma's proposal, I can start by first looking at what actually needed to be replaced (for example by studying the PRETTY FORMATS section in 'man git-log', what which verbs you can use in the ref-filter ('man git-for-each-ref') to achieve the same thing. Then I can research how one format is implemented in 'pretty.c', and see how a similar thing using the ref-filter is implemented in 'ref-filter.c'. 4. Recheck documents and run test scripts. Necessary step to check the behavior of code. * Benefits to Community I'm willing to stay around after the project. By that time, I will be in my second year without classes. And my tutor has an open mind about my request to involve in an open source project by now. Considering the subjective and objective conditions, I think there is a high possibility that I will stay around. Particularly, I wish to be a co-mentor if I have the ability. There may be some difficulties. But what I learn from my finite experience is that you should not refuse something positive just because of the difficulties in the mind. A fresh new job may be difficult, but it can show me the possibilities of the world, which means changing my mind. What's more, I tried to persuade a schoolmate who I think is kind of obsessed with technology to take part in an open source community for both self-growth and companion. And I failed, because he thinks it is hard. It's always hard to change Others' deep-rooted ideas by word. But I think the actions speak louder than words. Maybe after the project, I can change the minds of people around me about joining an open source community. There may be no visual benefits to the Git Community but should be beneficial to the whole open source community. * Microproject t9700: modernize test scripts [5] The microproject patches have been merged. The merge info is as below: commit 8760a2b3c63478e8766b7ff45d798bd1be47f52d Merge: a2d2b5229e 509d3f5103 Author: Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> Date: Tue Feb 28 16:38:47 2023 -0800 Merge branch 'zy/t9700-style' Test style fixes. * zy/t9700-style: t9700: modernize test scripts * Plan ** Timeline and deliverables The official GSOC code time start from 05-29 to 08-28, which is 13 weeks. The period from 06-05 to 06~30 is near the end of the semester. There are many classes for me. So I guess I may be not productive during this period. I think it is a bit time-limited if I follow the official timeline. It seems necessary to do some work in advance. 1. preparatory work: Period: 04-01 ~ 05-28 about 8 weeks Tasks: 1. Decide which parts need to work and which has priority. 2. Read Hariom's blogs. 3. Trying to understand the formatting logic behind pretty and ref-filter. (Maybe try gdb?) 4. Try to make some trial change 2. Write draft of documents and test scripts. Period: 05-29 ~ 06-02 week 1 Tasks: Based on the preparatory work, write drafts of doc and test. Deliverables: Drafts of documents and test scripts 3. Inactive Period Period: 06-05 ~ 06-30 week 2~5 4 weeks Tasks: 1. Build the base of other works like atoms. 2. Should pass some special tests. Deliverables: A new atoms 4. Active code period 1 Period: 07-03 ~ 07-07 week 6 Tasks: 1. Add a new argument and grab functions for the atoms 2. Need to pass tests and in same with documents Deliverables: A new argument and its grab function 5. Midterm evaluation Period: 07-10 ~ 07-14 week 7 Tasks: 1. Submitting midterm evaluations 2. Maybe need to continue the work left from last week Deliverables: midterm evaluation 6. Active code period 2 Period: 07-17 ~ 08-04 week 8~10 3 weeks Tasks: 1. Add 2~3 new arguments 2. Also need to pass tests and in same with documents. 3. Drafts of documents and test scripts should be updated. Deliverables: 1. New arguments 2. Documents 3. test scripts 7. Finishing touches Period: 08-07 ~ 08-26 week 11~13 3 weeks Tasks: 1. There should be some bugs to fix or work left. 2. This period is also left for unexpected events. 3. Submit final work product and final mentor evaluation. Deliverables: 1. final work product 2. final mentor evaluation * Grasp from related work ** From Hariom Verma's blog Walking through the blogs of Hariom Verma, I find many things useful. *** Debugging An extremely informative(step-by-step) debugging guide by Christian. [6] *** 11 questions for understanding someone's work. [7] 1. What was the goal of each patch? 2. which approach did she took to achieve the goal? 3. what were the goals of the patch series? 4. which approach did she took to achieve the goals? 5. what was the goal of her previous patch series? 6. what was the general direction her patch series were going? 7. why did she took that direction? 8. are there ways to continue in the same direction? 9. are there ways to achieve similar goals? 10. how were her goals similar and different from the goals in my proposal? 11. is it possible to use the same approach? *** Else There are many details about his work progress. I can refer to them when I am in similar situations. ** From ZheNing Hu's blog *** Time analyzing Use performance testing tools to analyze the time-consuming steps of `git cat-file --batch`. Using Google's `gperftools`: 1. Add the link parameter `-lprofiler` in `config.mak`: `CFLAGS += -lprofiler`. 2. `make`. 3. Use `CPUPROFILE=/tmp/prof.out /<path>/git cat-file --batch-check --batch-all-objects` to run the git and general `prof.out`, which contains the results of performance analysis. 4. Use `pprof --text /<path>/git /tmp/prof.out` to display the result in the terminal. *** About Github CI "GitHub-Travis CI hints" in Documentation/SubmittingPatches *** Else He also writes his process of debugging and optimization in detail. It's worth deepening into when I need them. This proposal draft benefits from the works of predecessors much. Thanks. * Biograhical information It is always funny to recall that I first learned about Linux in a stimulated hacker game in my fresh year in college. After that, I tried to teach myself Linux and started to know open source projects. Overcome many difficulties and I finally know something shallow about Linux. As a side effect, I am more enthusiastic and better at programming compared with my schoolmates. But the period of stagnation came, I began to write some meaningless projects for school tasks and repeated myself without progress. The best out of the worst, I touched excellent open source software during the time, such as vim, emacs, visual studio code, Qt, VLC and, of course, git. Near the end of my junior year, I read an article about learning by contributing to an open source project by a geek in the community of emacs. Almost at the same time, I knew the GSOC and preferred to take part in git. But it was near the start date of my plan for postgraduate qualifying examination. So I just postponed the stuff for GSOC. Luckily, I passed the examination. After I got used to life as a postgraduate student, I felt the motivation to progress again. Then I tried to contribute for git. Now I just finished a micro project, which seems trivial. But it really let me have a deeper understanding of open source and free software and more motivation to contribute. I hope I can stay here a long time before being involved with other interesting projects since the quality is more important than the quantity. I know it seems a bit stubborn to believe that contributing will lead to progress, which is also influenced by my learning attitude. But without action, I can not verify the belief. Sooat least I will try to contribute for one year. After that, I hope I can have a better understanding. Sorry, the above text may be messing. In short, I will try to contribute for git for at least one year. * Closing remarks It seems blogs will help much for later work. I think It worth rebuilding my blog site on github. Thanks for Christian Couder's and Hariom Verma's help. [1] https://public-inbox.org/git/CAOLTT8SxHuH2EbiSwQX6pyJJs5KyVuKx6ZOPxpzWLH+Tbz5F+A@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ [2] https://harry-hov.github.io/blogs/posts/the-final-report [3] https://public-inbox.org/git/pull.1281.git.1657202265048.gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx/ [4] https://public-inbox.org/git/pull.1452.git.1672102523902.gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx/#t [5] https://lore.kernel.org/git/20230222040745.1511205-1-18994118902@xxxxxxx/ [6] https://public-inbox.org/git/CAP8UFD3Bd4Af1XZ00VyuHnQs=MFrdUufKeePO1tyedWoReRjwQ@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ [7] https://harry-hov.github.io/blogs/posts/week1-the-ten-questions
