dulwich-users team mailing list archive

[Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 2010-07-19 at 14:56 +0200, Matthew Daniel wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 19, 2010 at 1:03 PM, Jelmer Vernooij <jelmer@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > The easiest thing to do is probably to send a merge request ("bzr send")
> > and CC both merge@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx and this mailing list. That way we
> > can respond to the merge request in-line here, and Launchpad will track
> > the status of your merge request and mark it as merged automatically
> > when it gets merged.
> I received a response from Dave asking that I move the functionality
> into a more library-style setup, rather than having the "dulwich"
> script have so much logic.
> 
> Would you rather have the `bzr send` now, or wait until the code is
> transitioned per Dave's request?
I didn't see Dave's request, but it might be worthwhile discussing the
place of bin/dulwich.

The dulwich executable at the moment is just a trivial frontend for the
Dulwich library, used for testing. It was never really meant as a tool
to be used by end users. Personally I see Dulwich as just a python
library for accessing git files/protocols, and I hardly ever use the
dulwich binary (I always use Dulwich through Bazaar). 

Other people have suggested writing other UIs for Git in Python (both
command-line and graphical) on top of Dulwich and I'd like to help them
by providing whatever they need. I'm wondering though if a clone of the
standard Git command-line UI is useful and maintainable in the Dulwich
codebase itself or whether it is perhaps out of scope for the project
and better placed in a separate project.

Thoughts?

Cheers,

Jelmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part