[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Monotone-devel] serialization format

From: Stephen Leake
Subject: Re: [Monotone-devel] serialization format
Date: Mon, 04 Apr 2016 15:26:19 -0500
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (windows-nt)

Markus Wanner <address@hidden> writes:

> Hello Stephen,
> thanks for your feedback.
> On 04/04/2016 06:58 PM, Stephen Leake wrote:
>> Human readable makes testing and developing new features much easier. If
>> we use binary, we will need a separate tool that translates that to
>> readable, which is then another source of bugs (or the same source, just
>> in a different place).
> Yeah, that's a point. However, I'd also argue that we should target the
> user and not the developer. And from a user's perspective, isn't
> monotone the very tool that does that kind of translation?
> Or put another way: Do *users* really care what serialization format
> monotone uses underneath?

No, users don't care (as long as the tools work).

Caveat; if they have to compose an email with the Monotone output (to
send it somewhere), ASCII text is safer than binary.

But that means they have no opinion on basic_io vs json, either.

Unless there are _other_ tools (not provided by monotone) that users
could use with Monotone output if it was other than basic_io.

-- Stephe

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]