On 25/07/11 02:13PM, Lucas Seiki Oshiro wrote: > 1. How would this integration be done? Making this `git repo` command only as a > house for two different subcommands, or making it a common interface for our > work. An argument for separated subcommands is that `repo-info` is a light > command, while `survey` is more computationally expensive. An argument for > having a common interface is having a standard format for requesting and > retrieving data from both sources. > > 2. A solution for 1. would be keeping the idea of having `repo-info` and > `survey` as two subcommands (perhaps `git repo info` and `git repo stats`), > following the same output format. This would also make room for a third > command which would return data from both commands. Then `git repo` would be > a plumbing command (`git survey` is more porcelain-ish), and its machinery > could be used by a separate porcelain command for formatting its output in a > more human-readable way. For some additional context, Stolee sent an RFC series[1] which proposed the git-survey(1) command as a native tool to complement git-sizer(1) a little while ago and I've been interested in pushing this topic forward. As a first step, I think we could introduce as command, such as `git repo stats`, which focuses on computing "interesting" stats about a repository similar to git-sizer(1). The output format for this would be simple key/value pairs for now similar to what Lucas has proposed in git-repo-info(1). As there are similarities in command scope with git-repo-info(1), I think it would make sense to group these operations together under the same top-level command. -Justin [1] 7d43a1634bbe2d2efa96a806e3de1f1fd480041b.1725935335.git.gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx
