From: Stefan Sperling Subject: Re: Cleanup hardcoded got naming in got.1 To: Josh Rickmar Cc: gameoftrees@openbsd.org Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2023 14:17:01 +0200 On Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 08:08:08AM -0400, Josh Rickmar wrote: > On Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 01:59:44PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote: > > On Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 07:37:12AM -0400, Josh Rickmar wrote: > > > On Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 07:30:47AM -0400, Josh Rickmar wrote: > > > > To make cvg diffs less ugly... > > > > > > Sorry, find/replaced in the wrong order when started editing the > > > original got.1 file. > > > > I would rather keep got.1 as-is and write a dedicated man page for cvg, > > once cvg has developed far enough to be usable in a basic fashion. > > Well, do we want cvg to only perform commit and update operations and > rely on got for everything else, or should cvg be complete enough to > be usable without got? In my mind cvg will eventually become a stand-alone client that handles everything needed to support its (relatively simple) use cases. Initially cvg can rely on Got/Git to take over tasks that haven't been implemented, much like Got relied on Git for many tasks early on. The cvg(1) man page would refer to got(1) as needed.