|Re: [jgit-dev] JGit without local filesystem|
On 17 Jun 2010, at 08:08, Shawn Pearce wrote:That sounds great, and I hope it goes in the right places to make it succedd :-)
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2010 at 11:56 PM, Matthias Sohn
> <matthias.sohn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> 2010/6/17 Shawn Pearce <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> I'm starting to do the refactoring required to support JGit running on
>>> different storage technologies beyond just the local filesystem.
I think the benefits easily outweigh the interim harm that will come (well, as long as you do it after tonight's demo ;-) and that we should do it as part of the 0.9 work. If 0.8.4 is our last 0.8.x release anyway, I'd say let's aim for the rename in the 0.9 form.
>>> I would rather rename the current Repository class to FileRepository,
>>> and then make Repository available for this new abstract base class.
>>> Its a pretty severe API breakage for applications, including EGit.
>>>  http://egit.eclipse.org/r/886
>> Yes, but if it's a pure rename I think the advantage going for clean names
>> the effort to adapt the existing code (my 2 ct). The main hassle will be to
>> adapt all
>> the pending changes.
> How much do we really have in-flight right now? Its going to be a bit
> of a hassle, but we might be able to just put through a pure-rename
> change very rapidly, and then let everyone rebase on top of it...
In addition, the OSGi bundles for EGit suggest a [0.8,0.9) dependency anyway, right? So we just bump up EGit 0.9's dependencies to [0.9,0.10) and move on.
Are there wider user lists for JGit that we can communicate the change out to?
Back to the top