Re: got(1) in base consideration

On Sun, May 04, 2025 at 08:50:46PM -0500, Kyle Evans wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I've been toying around with the idea of pulling got(1) into base, but
> hidden off into /usr/libexec and not supporting it for general usage. The
> idea would instead be to provide a script or two as a user-facing interface
> to do the bare minimum to functionally maintain a local copy of our git
> repos.
> 
> However, I've run into some logistics issues that I wanted to throw out for
> some opinions.  The main issue I've run into is that while got's repository
> layout is binary-compatible with git, it won't setup worktrees the same way.
> Additionally, it really doesn't like the traditional organization of a git
> clone, where you'd have your .git directory inside of your primary worktree
> (e.g., /usr/src and /usr/src/.git).
> 
> I don't think this is really a deal-breaker, my proposal to start with would
> be that we clone the repositories off into /var/db/got/$repo or some such
> and setup the worktrees in the traditional place.  git can `worktree add`
> from these repos successfully, so one could setup a git-compatible worktree
> at least without having to re-clone the entire repository, but that brings
> me to the second caveat noted in the paragraph above: the worktree format
> isn't compatible.
> 
> We could write a script that'll bridge the gap, but AFAICT that means that
> we'd effectively have to just blow away the existing got worktree at
> /usr/src and recreate it, with sensible guardrails in place to try and avoid
> losing any uncommitted work.  That's sort of ugly and I don't really know
> how to feel about it, thus this e-mail.
> 
> Thoughts?

What is the intended audience of the setup?
Who would not install normal git port but still want /usr/src populated?
For what purpose?