Rugged::Tree and Rugged::Index do similar things but have different APIs
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- C
- Stars
- 2.3k
- Forks
- 293
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
(Relates to #683)
It would be nice if Rugged::Index and Rugged::Tree provided the same methods where possible. For example, it would be nice if both supported the same interface for reading and enumerating objects.
Some ideas:
- Both should support
fetch(path, default=nil, &block)for looking up a path entry. - Both should support
each(prefix=nil)for enumerating entries efficiently. - Other methods where it makes sense (e.g.
each_tree,each_blob).
Some of these might also extent to Rugged::Tree::Builder, but I'm not sure how feasible that is.
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by comparing the public APIs of Rugged::Tree and Rugged::Index, then read the related discussion in issue #683. Determine which lookup and enumeration methods can share an interface and whether Rugged::Tree::Builder belongs in scope. Done means the desired common API and its scope are agreed and implemented consistently.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- ruby
- Domain
- api
- Issue type
- Refactor
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100