Am Donnerstag, den 04.06.2020, 13:36 +0200 schrieb Jean Abou Samra: > Hi, > Le 04/06/2020 à 08:31, James Lowe a écrit : > > On 03/06/2020 21:25, Karlin High wrote: > > > On 6/3/2020 3:14 PM, Jean Abou Samra wrote: > > > > There is a discussion at > > > > https://gitlab.com/lilypond/lilypond/-/issues/1012 > > > > about the future of lily-git.Basically, I think that it no > > > > longer > > > > makes sense to keep it now that we switched to GitLab. > > > > > > I remember seeing this thing bring in over 500MB of dependencies > > > on a > > > Debian Linux system. And I was thinking, "If that's the only > > > piece of > > > TCL in the whole LilyPond ecosystem, there has GOT to be a way > > > to > > > avoid having this." > > > > I am not sure that is correct, lily-git is just a set of python > > commands with a Front End GUI (for the likes of me) that made sure > > that you had set your git repo correctly and could easily download > > $LILYPOND_GIT. It also forced you to set your git user and email. > > > > Lily-git in and of itself was tiny and needed hardly anything to > > run > > (wish lily-git.tcl). > > > > The 500MB of dependencies was, I expect, for dblatex et al. That > > we > > needed for doc building at the time but lily-git only cloned the > > repo > > (and allowed a button to hard reset - again for idiots like me). > > > > I am a bit older and wiser now, but even so git is still a > > terrible > > 'ecosystem' not made much better by the gitlabs and githubs of the > > world (I have the joy of having to interface with both as a > > non-developer). That said, yes we don't 'need' lily-git, however > > I'd > > like to give a hat-tip to the few devs that kept it going so I > > could > > do my work. If it weren't for lily-git (and at the start 'lily-dev' > > - > > still less faff than containers and jails BTW for non-devs) I'd > > have > > not been able to easily contribute to this project and may have > > simply > > given up having to learn the terrible interface that is git cli > > with > > all the breakages of master we had at the start of when I joined. > > > > James > I do agree with you that Git can be a bit of a trick to learn (at > least, > there is a long path before you fully master it). What if right now > we > just added a link to some Git graphical client like > https://www.syntevo.com/smartgit/?
SmartGit is a great Git client, but it is proprietary, so we can't link to it (even provided they have a free (lowercase 'f') license for non- commercial work). Unfortunately I haven't yet found a Free GUI tool that made me feel comfortable, so I've always got back to it. > It doesn't remove the complexity of Git (obviously that's quite more > involved than lily-git, the target not being the same), but at the > very > least, you don't need to bother with a command-line interface. > > lily-git is not going to be usable in an immediate future. > Anyway, if I had to write something, I would do it in Python as per > the abovementioned issue (now that recent versions of Python ship > with tkinter). And as we're still trying to figure out how exactly > we are going to work with GitLab, starting a new tool right now > doesn't look like a good idea. So, what I would propose at this point > is > to drop lily-git.tcl, as it doesn't provide a value neither for a > user > these days, nor for the people that could develop a new tool in > Python > in the future; then, depending on how things go on, and if we feel > the > need for it, write lily-git.py or whatever. Maybe we could open an > issue > to track that. Makes sense? To me, yes. But I don't think that is too relevant here. Best Urs > > Best, > Jean Abou Samra > >