Community
Participate
Working Groups
Build Identifier: 20110301-1815 JGit still isn't as mature as Git (ignoring options, interoperability problems, doesn't seem to handle Putty based keys, etc.) It would be *really* nice to be able to configure EGit to use Git as the backend, rather than JGit. This would give users a workaround for issues like bug 335091 and bug 351723. Reproducible: Always
Personally I find this unlikely to be addressed.
Understood, I expected that this might be prohibitively difficult to accomplish, but after running into multiple bugs in just the first couple of days, almost all based on JGit limitations, I found myself desperate for any solution that uses the command line git as the backend. If it isn't possible fine, but I figured I'd ask.
There are alternate attempts to build a Git plugin that use C Git. I suggest you use the command line for those operations that we do not support and write bug reports for specific features.
(In reply to comment #3) > There are alternate attempts to build a Git plugin that use C Git. I looked and couldn't find any. Which projects are you aware of? > I suggest you use the command line for those operations that we do not support Sadly, these "operations" are core system wide behaviors like the merge.ff setting or commit hooks. Saying "use C Git for these operations" is almost like saying "don't use EGit for anything".
(In reply to comment #4) > (In reply to comment #3) > > There are alternate attempts to build a Git plugin that use C Git. > > I looked and couldn't find any. Which projects are you aware of? Aptana ships with a Git plug-in that interfaces with the command line I believe. > Sadly, these "operations" are core system wide behaviors like the merge.ff > setting or commit hooks. As you know there's already a bug open for the --no-ff case and I think there is one for commit hooks. If you find other things that are missing from JGit/EGit, please open a bug and let us know.
