Re: [Administrivia] On ruby and contrib/

[Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>]

Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> My initial reaction, too. It was hard enough to get Perl included with Git
> for Windows (because of that pesky Subversion dependency).

Nevertheless, we had to do it, and we did it.  We will do it again, if
we get enough important code written in Ruby.

> As you can see from the commit history, I was the primary force behind
> trying to get everything "core" in Git away from requiring scripting
> languages (I think it is an awesome thing to provide APIs for as many
> languages as possible, but a not-so-cool thing to use more than one
> language in the core code). It does not seem that anybody picked up that
> task when I left, though.

Rewriting everything in C?  Is anyone bored enough to pick up this
task?  Bourne shell is a great language for prototyping; git-rebase.sh
(and friends), git-stash.sh, git-pull.sh are doing just fine.  Sure,
it makes sense to do heavy-lifting in C, and this is happening as it
has always been happening (remember git-commit.sh?).  If you followed
the list emails, you'd know that Felipe is looking into delegating
large portions of the work done by git-rebase.sh to sequencer.c.

Anyway, all this talk about some hypothetical ideas just bores me.
What matters is what is currently happening.  And nobody is actively
rewriting the "core in Git" in C, so I don't see the point of
discussing anything but patches.