Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On 30/07/2025 15:58, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> "Tach via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> This provides a robust alternative to parsing traditional output >>> formats, making it easier to build reliable tools and automation >>> around Git status information. >> The writer is obviously biased ;-) but I find this a bit hand-wavy >> and unconvincing. > > I agree this isn't a very convincing reason. To me a more convincing > reason is that virtually every scripting language comes with a way to > parse json and base64 so if we emit json with path and ref names > encoded as base64 there is no need for script authors to write a > parser to parse our porcelain output. To me the fact that we have to > encode names using base64 is a sign that json is not particularly well > suited to the task but it is widely supported format. Very well put. Thanks.
