Re: Last mile to 1.0?

Ryan Anderson [off-list ref] writes:

How is this for a start?

A very good start indeed.  Thanks.

Git falls into the category of distributed source code management tools,
similar to Arch or Darcs (or, in the commercial world, BitKeeper).  This
means that every working directory is a full-fledged repository with
full revision tracking capabilities.

I think Kevin's comment is valid and his description is reasonable.

  o A collection of related projects are building on the core Git
    project, either to provide an easier to use interface on top (Darcs,
    Mercurial, StGit, Cogito), or to take some of the underlying concepts
    and reimplement them directly into another system (Arch 2.0).

I think you would want to drop Darcs and Mercurial from the "on
top" list.  If I understand correctly, Mercurial is
independently written with its own on-disk formats [*1*].  It
would be very unfair to put Darcs in "building on" category.
They've been there for quite some time with their own repository
format and the tools and interfaces are reasonably mature.

Instead, please add gitk and gitweb to the list.  We should not
forget that these "mostly read-only" things are Porcelains.


[Footnote]

*1* It feels that actually it is done right.  Its misfortune is
that many core kernel people have already switched to git.

Satturday, 23 July 2005 21:09 Junio C Hamano wrote:

Instead, please add gitk and gitweb to the list.  We should not
forget that these "mostly read-only" things are Porcelains.

Then add qgit too to provide fair coverage.

-- 
Respectfully
Alexey Nezhdanov