libgit2 / libgit2/libgit2sharp

The Filter API contains singleton Entry-points which are agnostic to `FilterMode`, does having `Clean` and `Smudge` entry-points make sense?

Open
#1,135 7 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Stabilization
Dominant language
C#
Stars
3.5k
Forks
925
PR merge metrics
No merged PRs in 30d

Description

Today the Filter object (the API we expose to lib consumers) contains the following entry-points:

  • virtual void Initialize()
  • virtual void Complete(string path, string root, Stream output)
  • virtual void Create(string path, string root, FilterMode)
  • virtual void Clean(string path, string root, Stream input, Stream output)
  • virtual void Smudge(string path, string root, Stream input, Stream output)

This is very uneven and, to my OCD, a fairly inconsistent API. I'm responsible and I'd like to change it, however some have already taken a dependency. In the spirit of #1103 I suggest changing the API to the following.

  • virtual void Initialize()
  • virtual void Complete(string root, string path, Stream output, FilterMode mode)
  • virtual void Create(string root, string path, FilterMode mode)
  • virtual void Apply(string root, string path, Stream input, Stream output, FilterMode mode)

I believe this is a simplified API which presents a consistent set of entry-points, and leaves the mode management up to the implementation of Filter. I'll happily make the changes and update the associated tests.

As a side note, I had a side-band discussion with @ethomson about how to handle the .gitattributes macros (example: [filter "lfs"] \n clean = git lfs clean %f \n smudge = git lfs smudge %f). While there are normal situations when you just know(tm) what to do on smudge and clean callbacks, ideally the filter would at least aware if the user has edited the values of the macro.

Assuming we can find a solution, whatever solution we'll find will likely end up impact this API. Perhaps then we should combine the two discussions here.

/CC @ammeep @shiftkey @nulltoken

Contributor guide

Open the contributing guide

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

Research direction

Start by reviewing the exposed Filter API and its associated tests, which the issue identifies as affected by the proposed signature changes. Then examine how .gitattributes clean and smudge macros are handled; done requires an agreed API design, updated dependents, and passing tests.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Assessment

Tech stack
csharp, git
Domain
backend-api-design, tooling
Issue type
Refactor
Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Activity status
Stale
Clarity
Mostly clear
Newbie friendliness
25/100

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.