Chad Walstrom <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...]
> Since we're revisiting it, I want to point out Graydon's reply > regarding I/O formats: > > http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg01927.html > > His opening sentence states it well: > > "I understand your concern, but I think you're over-stating > the problem (or failing to note the slow direction we're > already moving in)." > > He covers the problems of different formats in depth, and then closes > with: > > "I can tell you what my preference is, though: I'd prefer if > the automate commands all pumped out basic_io stanzas. I'd > prefer if you could send basic_io stanzas to monotone as > command sequences (say, for monotone stdio). I'd prefer if all > commands could be invoked via stdio. And I'd prefer, rather > than per-command things like --brief, that we do what marcel > suggested (and what, if you look, the ROADMAP file has listed > for some time), and give lua hooks a chance to control output > formatting in general, so that if you *don't* want basic_io, > there's something simple and general you can do about it." > > So, yes. Converging on basic_io and stdio is the "basic" idea. ;-) OK, that seems potentially clean: the C++ core of monotone deals with basic_io, and we have lua hooks that somehow convert from usable command line parameters to basic_io input, and from basic_io output to things useful for command line use, and perhaps separately for shellscript use. Obviously the default implementations need to provide something not too far off the current non-automate behaviour. (Graydon's also commented that the basic command line ought to be usable, and not require too much user scripting or a GUI to be useful.) _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
