Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Figure out inliner/extractor proxy #24

Open
terabyte opened this issue Mar 15, 2018 · 0 comments
Open

Figure out inliner/extractor proxy #24

terabyte opened this issue Mar 15, 2018 · 0 comments
Labels
discussion Potential change that requires discussion enhancement meta_tools impacts code in the meta-tools repo

Comments

@terabyte
Copy link
Member

Our tenative solution to some of QBT's "UI learning curve" is to use the extractor/inliner to make available a bidirectional mono-repo view of a QBT manifest. This means some users could commit to the manifest history as usual, and push pins, while others might instead choose to clone the monorepo view and treat the entire thing like a big git repo. Git commit, log, and diff would all work normally, and new commits pushed would be automatically extracted back to the normal manifest history.

Inliner/extractor are written, but we need a plan for how to keep these different "views" (branches) in sync, solve races, etc.

@terabyte terabyte added enhancement meta_tools impacts code in the meta-tools repo discussion Potential change that requires discussion labels Mar 15, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
discussion Potential change that requires discussion enhancement meta_tools impacts code in the meta-tools repo
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant