| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David E(dot) Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Managing multiple branches in git |
| Date: | 2009-06-02 22:56:33 |
| Message-ID: | 20718.1243983393@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
"David E. Wheeler" <david(at)kineticode(dot)com> writes:
> I should think that it'd be pretty damned easy to generate such a
> report from a Git repository's log. `git log` is extremely powerful,
> and provides a lot of interfaces for hooking things in and sorting.
> It's eminently do-able.
Well, it's not like CVS makes it easy ... cvs2cl is about 50K of perl,
and is not very speedy or without bugs :-(. So maybe we are setting
the goalposts in the wrong place by supposing that the lowest-level git
history needs to be exactly what's wanted for human consumption.
As long as it can be postprocessed into the form I do want to look at,
and someone will volunteer to write that postprocessor, the question
doesn't seem like a showstopper.
Meanwhile, there seem to have been ten different solutions proposed to
the problem of working with multiple branches/checkouts, and I plead
confusion. Anyone want to try to sort out the pluses and minuses?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | David E. Wheeler | 2009-06-02 23:01:53 | Re: Managing multiple branches in git |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-06-02 22:55:48 | Re: Managing multiple branches in git |