Re: [GSoC] Discussion of "Submodule related work" project
- Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2017 11:24:58 -0700
- From: Stefan Beller <sbeller@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [GSoC] Discussion of "Submodule related work" project
> So... I thought those items listed in "Submodule related work" are
> considered too small to be complete projects separately, and they
> are just "subprojects" of bigger project (maybe I have this thought
> because I can't estimate complexity before truly digging in).
When writing these points, I was not sure about the complexity
myself, but rather I wanted to produce a lot of different potential
projects, which can be discussed if they sound exciting and are
of good size.
> In your response you talk about them as independent projects...
> This means I can take only any one of them as starting point for
> my proposal? Or maybe I misunderstood you?
Well I think some of them are too small to stand alone for a full GSoC
project. Others have a good size and complexity for GSoC already.
> If it is true, than i'll try to take sh->C transition for submodule
For shell -> C transitions, see
as all of them are rewrites from sh -> C for different commands.
You might find common patterns (e.g. what is all needed for a conversion,
such as slight updates to tests or documentation; certainly updating
the build process in the Makefile, and of course the code translated).
Most of these conversions, start out with a patch that is quite a literal
translation and then afterwards add in optimizations.
Another approach for the conversion is outlined in73c2779f42
(builtin-am: implement skeletal builtin am). I am not sure how
easy this approach is for a submodule specific command.
> and as addirional part of my whole project also this:
Yeah, that is also a good task :) Thanks for bringing it up.
> Does it sound good? If does, then I'll begin to work on my proposal.