Add Dulwich to Appendinx B: embedding #999
Conversation
|
Would you mind waiting until #998 merges and rebasing this? I'd like to review it on its own, and it's going to have a small merge conflict. |
|
Absolutely. Thank you for a kind guidance. |
bzz
force-pushed
the
embedding/add-dulwich
branch
2 times, most recently
from
339b917 to
8cf5826
Compare
Signed-off-by: Alexander Bezzubov <bzz@apache.org>
bzz
force-pushed
the
embedding/add-dulwich
branch
from
8cf5826 to
93302a1
Compare
|
@ben small doc on pure-python library was rebased, updated and is ready for another pass |
| @@ -0,0 +1,44 @@ | |||
| === Dulwich | |||
|
|
|||
| (((Dulwich)))((("Python"))) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Interesting. Does this index entry require the quotes?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do not know, to be hones, I just copied it from libgit2 example.
Digging deeper, #471 seems to be a reason for those quotes.
Will be happy to remove those if you think there might be some side-effects, but I guess same logic should be applicable for go-git as well.
Let me know if you want me to remove both in this PR
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Alright, let's maybe clean them up in a separate PR then.
| [source, python] | ||
| ----- | ||
| from dulwich.repo import Repo | ||
| r = Repo('.') |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would you mind renaming this variable to current_repo or something similar? And maybe c should be called commit.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Right now it's just 1-to-1 copy from https://www.dulwich.io/docs/#getting-started
Please, let me know if you still think it should be change and I will be happy to do so.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hmm. Should we make this example more readable, or easier to update? Let's stick with Dulwich's example then.
aollier
added
the
translation backport
Adds one more way of embedding Git in your application using https://www.dulwich.io project.
Dulwich is independent Python implementation of the Git file formats and protocols.
As it touches the same files, it's based on/includes a commit from #998 and so will be rebased on top of it. Only ee2d9dd needs to be reviewed in here.