On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, David Kastrup wrote:
> Jan Hudec <bulb@xxxxxx> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 20:34:25 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
> >> Nicolas Pitre <nico@xxxxxxx> writes:
> >> > On Mon, 26 Nov 2007, David Kastrup wrote:
> >> >> Get rid of plumbing at the command line level.
> >> >
> >> > We can't get rid of plumbing.
> >>
> >> What about "at the command line level" did you not understand?
> >
> > Which part of we neither can nor want did you not understant?
> >
> > The availability of plumbing is really big part of a reason why git is
> > so good and has so many scripts and tool built on top of it.
>
> Which is the reason I proposed making the plumbing available at a
> scripting level, not at the command line level.
You're mixing two orthogonal issues, namely: 1) the scripting language,
and 2) the too large number of Git command accessible through your
default path.
#1 is a non issue really. We don't want to lock plumbing to any
particular scripting language, and the current interface is the most
universal one in that regard.
#2 can be solved through a single multiplexer such as 'git low-level'.
That 'git low-level foo' may just look up git-foo in some libexec
directory, and only 'git-low-level' need to be in the path instead of
all those plumbing commands.
Need only to have both forms ('git foo' and 'git low-level foo') to work
for a transition period.
Nicolas
-
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
