Re: [Javagit-users] NYU Open Source Programming Class Releases JavaGit API 0.1.0 Alpha

[Andrew C. <ac...@co...>]

I think javagit fills a much different role.  It's a quick and simple 
implementation that can get developed at an extremely quick pace as 
compared to a completely native implementation which has it's own 
advantages but which can take an extremely long time to develop.  I think 
it's also important that we continue to have good documentation, the lack 
of documentation for jgit is in my opinion a one of the main reasons it 
doesn't have more adopters.

--
Drew


On Tue, 5 Aug 2008, Ross Snyder wrote:

> With regard to my previous comment about JGit being largely undocumented: 
> this came from the version of JGit I downloaded at the beginning of the term 
> from here:
>
> http://freshmeat.net/projects/jgit/
>
> Turns out it's pretty dated (from September 2007) and in January 2008 
> (http://svnsearch.org/svnsearch/repos/EGIT/search?revision=383&showPaths=all), 
> JGit did indeed get JavaDoc comments for most public methods (confirmed by 
> grabbing a current clone of their repository).  However, the comments still 
> aren't up to the standards we've been using, and there's no surrounding 
> documentation - had there been, I wouldn't have ended up spending time 
> looking at an outdated version of JGit.  And they don't have anything 
> comparable to our cookbook page, to help you understand how to use their API.
>
>
> On Aug 4, 2008, at 11:48 PM, Andrew Case wrote:
>
>>>> 3) The javagit people found jgit lacking documentation and felt it would
>>>> be easier to write their own going in a different direction than to try
>>>> and jump into your project and starte mangling your code.
>>> 
>>> Interesting.  We've written a lot of Javadoc.  There's very little of the
>>> public API that isn't documented already.  I would have loved to have at
>>> least read their comments so we could take it for future improvements.
>> 
>> I'm not sure there was any comments about specific situations.  I it was
>> having a hard time following the code in general.  It's something that
>> tinkering with it for a month or so probably would have solved, but there
>> was a greater desire on their part to just get started and write our own.
>