Pavel Roskin <proski@gnu.org> writes:

quoted text
> Applying this patch before 1.0 may be controversial,...

If I am not mistaken, I thought the last thread on the list
showed general consensus that symlinks were preferred when
available.  So applying this patch anytime would be
controversial...

quoted text
> but I think there is a very good reason for that.

Which is...?  I do not think this paragraph justifies it:

quoted text
> There should be exactly one git 1.0 repository format.  Now we
> have two that are present in the sources and that have
> received testing from the git users.

The one format is that .git/HEAD can either be a symlink or
regular file text symref; both variants are tested -- wouldn't
that be good enough?

The only thing I can think of that might be inconvenient is if
you try doing "cp -a" off of a filesystem that supports symlinks
to another filesystem that does not -- probably that would fail
copying the symlinked .git/HEAD.  But if that is the problem,
you could always git-clone, which should do the right thing, I
think.

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html