On 04.12.2014, at 10:09, kilon alios <kilon.alios@gmail.com> wrote:
"Iâm not sure we need to discuss that, since there already is FileSystem-Git which *is* an implementation of Git in Smalltalkt..."
is ? really ? wow I am impressed I thought reimplementing git in smalltalk would be a huge effort. Pharo surprises me once more :)
Well, itâs not complete, far fromit actually. Git is huge⦠(also, see my response to Thierry)
so the problem now is to build the tools on top of it to utilize git ?
Yes, but the tools should use libgit2 bindings, not the Smalltalk implementation.
On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Max Leske <maxleske@gmail.com <mailto:maxleske@gmail.com>> wrote:
On 04.12.2014, at 09:47, kilon alios <kilon.alios@gmail.com <mailto:kilon.alios@gmail.com>> wrote:
What are the benefits that justify the effort to reimplementing git in smalltalk ?
Iâm not sure we need to discuss that, since there already is FileSystem-Git which *is* an implementation of Git in Smalltalkt...