Re: [boost] [Git] Documentation update

Subject: Re: [boost] [Git] Documentation update
From: Mateusz Loskot (mateusz_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-02-12 09:39:19

On 12 February 2013 14:25, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:18 PM, Rene Rivera <grafikrobot_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>> NOTE: Part of this discussion was within the release team. But it was
>> suggested that it should also be generally public. Hence I'm raising some
>> of the same issues from the private discussion.
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> on Mon Feb 11 2013, Rene Rivera <grafikrobot-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > On Mon, Feb 11, 2013 at 11:51 AM, Dave Abrahams <dave_at_[hidden]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> >>
>>> >> on Sun Feb 10 2013, Rene Rivera <grafikrobot-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> > On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 11:08 AM, Beman Dawes <bdawes_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>>> >> >
>>> >> > I ask because the testing will rely on dulwich git which does not talk
>>> >> > at all with bitbucket (it seems the bitbucket git server works
>>> >> > differently.. not that I blame it given the disfunction that is the
>>> >> > git server protocol).
>>> >>
>>> >> Oh, that's rather lame.  Is there a reason you're not going to use
>>> >> libgit2 instead of dulwich?
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Yes.. The python bindings for libgit2 are terribly/unusably incomplete.
>>>
>>> Surely they're complete enough to allow you to clone and pull, no?  What
>>> more do you need?
>>>
>>
>> Why would one assume that? First there is no binding to "git_clone" <
>> https://github.com/search?q=git_clone+repo%3Alibgit2%2Fpygit2&type=Repositories&ref=advsearch&l=>.
>> So it's a nonstarter at step zero. Second there are no bindings for
>> submodules/subrepos. Which might be an additional nonstarter if the
>> git_clone didn't recurse clone/pull subrepos.
>>
>> I was faced with either implementing some of the additional
>> clone/pull/checkout/update code with dulwich or likely implement even more
>> for libgit2. Hence I'm sticking with dulwich. Since at least that gives the
>> advantage of being pure Python.
>
> I must be missing something. Why not just work through the python
> subprocess interface? For example, here is how Marshall issues an "svn
> export" in the snapshot.py script:
>
> import subprocess
> ...
>
> def svnExport(url, eol, revisionStr, dest):
>         command_arr = [ "svn", "export", "--non-interactive", "--native-eol",
> eol, "-r", revisionStr, url, dest ]
>         subprocess.check_output ( command_arr )
> ...

Such approach has proved to work very well for myself too:

https://github.com/mloskot/pygit-svn-mirror/blob/master/lib/gitsvnmirror.py

Best regards,
--
Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net