From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [GSoC update] Sequencer for inclusion Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 02:47:07 -0400 Message-ID: <20110712064706.GA13375@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1310396048-24925-1-git-send-email-artagnon@gmail.com> <20110711171713.GA5963@elie> <7vpqlgbjmd.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20110711221419.GE30155@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , Jonathan Nieder , Git List , Christian Couder , Daniel Barkalow , Miles Bader To: Ramkumar Ramachandra X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Jul 12 08:47:16 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QgWkW-0008AK-5A for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 08:47:16 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755287Ab1GLGrK (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2011 02:47:10 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:53368 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754638Ab1GLGrJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 Jul 2011 02:47:09 -0400 Received: (qmail 10115 invoked by uid 107); 12 Jul 2011 06:47:32 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Tue, 12 Jul 2011 02:47:32 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 12 Jul 2011 02:47:07 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 12:11:44PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > > Or is it something that, like the information in .git/rebase-apply, > > people might want to read or tweak? In that case, might it make sense to > > follow that lead and split things into one file per item? That keeps the > > parsing burden extremely low for things like shell scripts (or shell > > users) who might want to read or tweak. > > Yes, it's a little like the information in .git/rebase-apply. We > should give the user the ability to tweak it by hand: the result from > sq_quote_argv and sq_dequote_argv would look very ugly. Hm, I don't > like the one-file-per-command-line-option approach because: we might > only have a few options now, but when the sequencer is built to > support many actions and options, the directory will be polluted with > lots of files. I was thinking more along the lines of something that > can be parsed using gitconfig. I don't consider having lots of files there "pollution", but rather "a well-used key/value store". But I suppose it is in the eye of the beholder. :) Using git-config is maybe a little more self-documenting than something like "sq_quote_argv". And probably not much more code (maybe even less, since it can handle the file update for you). I recently used the config code to write out a non-standard config file. My two complaints were: 1. You can't queue up a bunch of changes and then write the file once. Every time you call git_config_set, it rewrites the whole file. 2. There's no way to write to a nonstandard file short of the horribly hack-ish: const char *saved = config_exclusive_filename; config_exclusive_filename = "foo.conf"; git_config_set(...); config_exclusive_filename = saved; Point (2) is pretty easy to fix. But point (1) might be a bit more involved. I haven't really looked yet. -Peff