logoalt Hacker News

mananaysiempretoday at 11:04 AM2 repliesview on HN

There were a few efforts like that back in the day (when people still cared about offline and store-and-forward-style operation[1]), like Bugs Everywhere[3], git-appraise[4] which stored its data in Git’s little-known “notes” namespace[5], and git-bug[6] which for some reason I’ve seen mentioned quite a bit in such threads recently unlike the others—though I’m not complaining about one of them getting mentioned at least.

Also, as far as read-only access, Gerrit review data is actually accessible via Git[7] (for review ABCDE, pull refs/changes/DE/ABCDE/meta instead of one of the usual numbered refs under that prefix), and someone made the effort[8] to make it accessible via Git notes too (as mentioned in the post on Git notes that I linked above).

Also also, the Fossil SCM of SQLite fame somewhat famously does[9] do this kind of thing with its builtin bug tracker. It has been relegated to obscurity partly as an accident of history (Git won) and partly on the merits (it is aggressively hostile to the kind of history rewriting we are used to routinely—if not always wisely—performing in Git).

Going back to working on top of Git, though, I think that part of the problem is that you really want custom merge strategies when you’re trying to build a fancy datatype, and Git’s support for them requires a lot of wrapping to make it seamless (the location tracking stuff in git-annex[10] is the only success story I am aware of, and that’s a sizeable Haskell project). The existing porcelain is just too rigid.

[1] Can I have a viable replacement for PGP for that use case? Please stop telling me that I don’t exist and should screw off[2]? Please?..

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44239804

[3] https://github.com/aaiyer/bugseverywhere

[4] https://github.com/google/git-appraise

[5] https://tylercipriani.com/blog/2022/11/19/git-notes-gits-coo..., https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44345334 (579 points, 146 comments)

[6] https://github.com/git-bug/git-bug

[7] https://gerrit-review.googlesource.com/Documentation/note-db...

[8] https://gerrit.googlesource.com/plugins/reviewnotes/+/refs/h...

[9] https://fossil-scm.org/home/doc/trunk/www/bugtheory.wiki

[10] https://git-annex.branchable.com/


Replies

ralferootoday at 1:38 PM

Lots of good points. As for the last point, most review tools seem to be centered on tracking a branch ref over time. The actual merge strategy probably doesn't really matter as long as the tool can see that the watched reference now points to a new commit.

onionisafruittoday at 2:10 PM

Well cited. Even your citations have citations.

show 1 reply