Re: VC mode and git

[Stephen J. Turnbull]

Eric S. Raymond writes:
 > Stephen J. Turnbull <address@hidden>:
 > > Perhaps rather than assuming a universal meaning for DWIM, C-x v v
 > > could implement a limited concept of "workflow".  Eg, a workflow could
 > > be modeled by a list ((LEXP1 OP1) (LEXP2 OP2) ...), and the workflow
 > > would be implemented something like
 > > 
 > >     (catch 'done
 > >       (mapc (lambda (kv)
 > >               (let ((lexp (first kv))
 > >                     (op (second kv)))
 > >                 (if (eval lexp) (throw (funcall op)))))))
 > > 
 > > A couple of default workflows could be provided.
 > 
 > That sounds like lots of complexity for small gain to me.

The complexity is already there, it's just hardwired and inflexible,
and would become much more complex for not so much flexiblity if you
provide a couple of optional hardwired workflows.

But I'm not volunteering to implement and maintain either, so I guess
the point is moot.