Hi Matthieu! > Hi, > > I just realized that we have a real mess about xhg-log. > > We have one function xhg-log, which doesn't use the DVC log > infrastructure, and one xhg-dvc-log, which does, and which is the one > registered for C-x V L. > > I really think we should get rid of the non-DVC version, it multiplies > the efforts to manage multiple back-ends. If some features are > interesting in xhg-log (the ability to show the diff inline can be, > but *I* prefer having it in a separate buffer), they should be > contributed to dvc-log.el, so that other back-ends can benefit of it > too.
I confirm that this is a valuable long or mid term goal. The only issue I see, that the xhg-log function is faster than the xhg-dvc-log. This will probably be fixed with faster computers in the future ;-) So we need to enhance the xhg-dvc-log functionality to offer the same features as with xhg-log. When this is done and when the performance of the new function is not too bad, we can drop xhg-log. But only then. Stefan. _______________________________________________ Dvc-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/dvc-dev
