sapling VS go-git

The headline times are a bit ridiculous. Are they trying to turn https://github.com/facebook/sapling/blob/main/eden/fs/docs/O... or some git fuse thing into a product?

You might be interested in how this problem was solved by our team at Meta, in EdenFS (https://github.com/facebook/sapling/blob/main/eden/fs/docs/O...) and Watchman: https://github.com/facebook/watchman.

What you're describing is reasonably similar to EdenFS, except EdenFS runs in userspace.

Watchman layers a consistent view of file metadata on top of inotify (etc), as well as providing stateless queries on top of EdenFS. It acts as a unified interface over regular filesystems as well as Eden.

Back in the day, Watchman sped up status queries by over 5x for a repo with hundreds of thousands of files: https://engineering.fb.com/2014/01/07/core-infra/scaling-mer... I worked directly on this and co-wrote this blog post.

In truth, getting these working was a very difficult systems problem with a ton of event ordering and cache invalidation concerns. For smaller repos, it is much simpler to do linear scans. Since it is really fast on modern hardware anyway, it is also the right thing to do, following the maxim of doing the simplest thing that works.

It's not really anything like Mercurial anymore. It superficially resembles "hg" but it's a very hacked fork. It's more like sappling. https://sapling-scm.com

How does this compare to sapling? https://github.com/facebook/sapling

Coming from a Meta background (not speaking on behalf of Meta):

"package/dependency management" - Everything is checked into a monorepo, and built with [Buck2](https://buck2.build/). There's tooling to import/update packages, but no need to reinvent pip or other package managers. Btw, Buck2 is pretty awesome and supports a ton of languages beyond python, but hasn't gotten a ton of traction outside of Meta.

"linting, formatting" - [Black](https://github.com/psf/black) and other public ecosystem tooling is great, no need to develop internally.

"why is type checking the exception" - Don't know about Astral, but for Meta / Google, most everyone else doesn't design for the scale of their monorepos. Meta moved from SVN to Git to Mercurial, then forked Mercurial into [Sapling](https://sapling-scm.com/) because simple operations were too slow for the number of files in their repo, and how frequently they receive diffs.

There are obvious safety benefits to type checking, but with how much Python code Meta has, mypy is not an option - it would take far too much time / memory to provide any value.

Is it still used there? I know they did in the past, but reading up a bit on the background on all of this I found https://github.com/facebook/sapling

Sapling is actively developed, not "dead after 3 months": https://github.com/facebook/sapling/commits/main/

Have not tried building Buck2 (no personal use for it), but its also actively developed: https://github.com/facebook/buck2/commits/main/

https://github.com/facebook/sapling/tree/main/eden

I'm still unsure if a complete, viable eden solution was released with all of its necessary components.

Notably, libgit2[1] is GPLv2 with a full linking exception, while e.g. go-git[2] is Apache2.

[1] https://github.com/libgit2/libgit2

[2] https://github.com/go-git/go-git

One of the main libraries we use in the Pizza-CLI is the go-git library, a pure git implementation in Go that is highly extensible. During CODEOWNERS generation, this library enables us to iterate the git ref log, look at code diffs, and determine which git authors are associated with the configured attributions defined by a user.

I interpret "aims to be fully compatible" as meaning the operations it implements are intended to be compatible with how Git implements those operations. I do not interpret this statement as saying they implement all features of Git.

They offer a document which directly shows what is and isn't supported, and it specifically notes quite a few things that aren't supported yet: https://github.com/go-git/go-git/blob/master/COMPATIBILITY.m...

The godoc also says right upfront it "nowadays covers the majority of the plumbing read operations and some of the main write operations, but lacks the main porcelain operations such as merges." - https://pkg.go.dev/github.com/go-git/go-git/v5#pkg-overview

> I'm saying it's not a reasonable choice over just using git directly, and is unlikely to ever be.

OK, that's apparently true for your use-case. But again, what go-git implements is directly useful to a number of very popular projects, as well as literally two thousand less popular ones.

I find the exported functionality to be high quality, at least for my own use-case. I'm not commenting on the code quality. If I need a shed for bikes, and someone is giving out free but ugly bikesheds, I'm thankful. I don't complain about the color of the bikeshed.

The go frameworks has some particular limitations at the moment (merge, rebase https://github.com/go-git/go-git/blob/master/COMPATIBILITY.md) but overall great framework.Used for some go tools..

You can monitor the sha of your config repos main branch with this I expect. https://github.com/go-git/go-git

I'm remaking a package named owl. One of the features of this package is the ability to clone remote repositories. The first time I affront this problem, I solved it using go.Cmd and git command. Is there a way to achieve something similar without importing or using a dependency like go-git. Something like download files via http, ssh or something similar.

I think there are already some Git SDKs out there. For example https://github.com/go-git/go-git