On Jun 11, 11:07 am, "Ville M. Vainio" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Been thinking about the same thing in the background for quite a while. > > Have some ideas, but too busy to communicate. Take your time. We'll likely be investigating the possibilities for years. > The important drawback > is that we would have to go for zillions-of-separate-files approach > instead of single .leo file + thin nodes. There are many possible workarounds. We could, for example, use zodb as a container for the files. Or we could steal all the git ideas, and do them in Python. In particular, the time constraints that are so important for git may not apply to Leo. Of course, we won't rewrite git lightly--think of it as a thought experiment. > If we were only thinking of this from the in-memory/temporary tree > undo stack point of view, it would be different thing altogether. I'm sure you and I will have no problem keeping implementation issues near the front of the back of our minds :-) But for the present, we are in the happiest of situations. The potential merger of Leo and git, and maybe zodb, and maybe even pyfuse, **creates new problems** that simply can not arise in the realm of the various components separately. These new problems are exactly what we want; they will lead directly to unexpected new inventions. Edward --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
