Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Craig A. Berry" <craigberry@nospam.mac.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.vms
Subject: Re: in-memory editing with EDT or EVE
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2024 20:54:06 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 38
Message-ID: <vhu4gg$1v7cm$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vhr9ct$1dilp$1@dont-email.me> <vhrd3u$1dqca$3@dont-email.me>
 <vhsm4i$1nfvc$1@dont-email.me> <vhsotb$rki$1@reader2.panix.com>
 <vht5qt$1qel2$1@dont-email.me> <vht6v1$1qfvl$1@dont-email.me>
 <vhtd6v$1rl0c$1@dont-email.me> <vhttf3$1u7an$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2024 03:54:26 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="dc2cd1b9afaacc22f11f6ead9edc5b06";
	logging-data="2071958"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18hWwwOXdevt4LsdF6zDcnFWZCj6XzJTO4="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:MayPQ/5JojpjXSVhVayOiqW/72M=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vhttf3$1u7an$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 2753


On 11/23/24 6:53 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 11/23/2024 3:16 PM, Craig A. Berry wrote:

>> There is no "client."  In a DVCS like git, when you commit a change,
>> everything is written locally.  Pushing to a server is an optional
>> separate operation and what you push is the version history that has
>> been written locally first.  There is never a point where the commit
>> message is sent over the network to another machine before being stored
>> as one component of a commit.
> 
> OK. I am still thinking SVNish. Sorry.
> 
> But does it matter?
> 
> edit disk file--read disk file--write to local repo
> vs
> edit in memory--write to local repo
> 
> still seem like a difference to me.
> 
> Or is git external editor actual editing the final file
> inside the repo?

As I tried to explain before, a git commit consists of the metadata
(author, timestamp, etc.), the commit message, the branch, and the
actual diff content of the changeset.  All of the other pieces are
stored on-disk, so it's hard to see a reason to keep the commit message
in memory when it needs to be combined with the other pieces in order to
produce the commit.

It should also be mentioned that the editor used for editing commit
messages is configurable, so git's process for producing a commit needs
to work with any and every editor.

What problem are you trying to solve by keeping a kilobyte or three in
memory instead of persisting it to disk where any and every utility in
the toolbox can operate on it?