On Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 08:08:08AM -0400, Josh Rickmar wrote:
> On Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 01:59:44PM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > On Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 07:37:12AM -0400, Josh Rickmar wrote:
> > > On Sat, Jul 08, 2023 at 07:30:47AM -0400, Josh Rickmar wrote:
> > > > To make cvg diffs less ugly...
> > > 
> > > Sorry, find/replaced in the wrong order when started editing the
> > > original got.1 file. 
> > 
> > I would rather keep got.1 as-is and write a dedicated man page for cvg,
> > once cvg has developed far enough to be usable in a basic fashion.
> 
> Well, do we want cvg to only perform commit and update operations and
> rely on got for everything else, or should cvg be complete enough to
> be usable without got?

In my mind cvg will eventually become a stand-alone client that handles
everything needed to support its (relatively simple) use cases.

Initially cvg can rely on Got/Git to take over tasks that haven't been
implemented, much like Got relied on Git for many tasks early on.
The cvg(1) man page would refer to got(1) as needed.