From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Felipe Contreras Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/13] New remote-hg helper Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2012 20:20:28 +0100 Message-ID: References: <20121029215631.GF20513@sigill.intra.peff.net> <5090EFCA.7070606@drmicha.warpmail.net> <509149D9.3070606@drmicha.warpmail.net> <20121102144618.GA11170@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Michael J Gruber , Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org, Junio C Hamano , Sverre Rabbelier , Ilari Liusvaara , Daniel Barkalow To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Nov 02 20:20:46 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TUMnL-0006Fh-GC for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 20:20:43 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755243Ab2KBTUa (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Nov 2012 15:20:30 -0400 Received: from mail-ob0-f174.google.com ([209.85.214.174]:37952 "EHLO mail-ob0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754505Ab2KBTU3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 2 Nov 2012 15:20:29 -0400 Received: by mail-ob0-f174.google.com with SMTP id uo13so3929628obb.19 for ; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 12:20:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=uUscxhWdFqw3CDWBNHEWqYV+p4Fs4k/bT4XMGcMRzn4=; b=vx9BQCILyfXXM8wdqVyoRh3NuImriCeaMntMuIPDc+3sNf1mT1LO0mSW3nSgiLHo9g +iPCZSHUJdYHqTH7/u9sSuVpqAW/VNXuBHEm2F2lGr1WHEcdqSP+PttOkORpF4hpbSJ0 FvXM1r6CmbSs4ZzvWSwlZzZSVYAYIKXWHhFQcr6Av0ixG1yvxONNeuXusvXyiWH+cs8P Kyo71P5XxKPSmvZeyynN0pltMB3vpVL6Gjs+yQVFgoSo3Qqp5lRPYIAx8DBNetuKJoxm 7Vc3oYKYtOsRUzxXK2RjvSjxP5jNqLOY5qryBLOott3QhjXsqrJvQL6yM4GfUx+FFrDK 3AuQ== Received: by 10.182.10.6 with SMTP id e6mr2191785obb.16.1351884028634; Fri, 02 Nov 2012 12:20:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.60.4.74 with HTTP; Fri, 2 Nov 2012 12:20:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Nov 2, 2012 at 7:39 PM, Felipe Contreras 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 So, what do we need a python framework for? Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras