Re: [Gnu-arch-users] empty commits, wrappers, and version control frawemork

[Miles Bader]

On Sun, May 23, 2004 at 05:50:18PM -0400, James Blackwell wrote:
> >     It's getting time to start saying "no" to new convenience features
> >     into tla and push people towards aba, raw (the python shell from Rob
> >     Weir, soon to be released) and mala (the macro language from
> >     Christian Th?ther, still "almost vapor" according to the author).
> 
> This may be where we part ways.
> 
> I see tla itself as the one place where we have a guarantee of some sort
> of consistancy of interface across heterogenous machines. Aba may be on
> one machine, raw on another and mala on yet another. However, no matter
> where I go, tla will be there. 

I agree.

If we were to start advocating a `higher level' interface, it should be
(1) included with tla, and (2) something with some thought put into it,
_designed_ as a higher level replacement for tla.

My impression is that current wrappers like aba are more like `grab bag of
random useful stuff the author liked' than any attempt to make a consistent
and intuitive interface.

Whenever I see Aaron post about adding something to aba, there's a feeling
that because it's `merely a wrapper', there's no great pressure to be very
selective about what goes into it.  This is fine for the current state, but
it _isn't_ fine if we were to begin `pushing people' towards it in preference
to tla.

-Miles
-- 
"Whatever you do will be insignificant, but it is very important that
 you do it."  Mahatma Ghandi