On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Matthieu Moy <matthieu....@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote: > Ramkumar Ramachandra <artag...@gmail.com> writes: > >>> Whether it's based on POSIX is an implementation detail for the user. >>> The real question is more command-line Vs GUI than POSIX/Win32. Some >>> Linux users like GUI, some windows users use command-line. I tried IDE >>> integration with EGIT, and quite frankly I ended-up doing all the Git >>> stuff in a terminal next to Eclipse. >> >> I see. But isn't it possible to implement a CLI in libgit2 too, no? > > Yes (there have actually been several attempts at this like > https://github.com/Romain-Geissler/git2 and > https://github.com/vfr-nl/git2/), but there are a *lot* of stuff that > are in git.git and not in libgit2. > > I'd love to see Git re-implemented on top of libgit2, but that's not > going to happen tomorrow :-\.
Specially not if we *always* keep the status quo, and don't make better use of C and scripting languages. One of the advantages of Ruby is that it can be very easily extended from C. I have never seen an easier way to write bindings than in Ruby. If we allowed Ruby to be in the core, it would make sense to create official Ruby bindings, and that would create an enormous motivation for libigit/libgit2 to be complete. But if we always keep the status quo, there will never be that much motivation for such an effort. -- Felipe Contreras -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
