On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 01:39:30PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:Yes, I was hoping my message would help provoke them to say "here is why I did not do it back then, and why this should be revisited now". But all it seems to have done is bring up more arguments that should have been given back then. So for that I apologize, since I know that is exactly what you did not want to read. ;) I was slightly negative on the change at the time of "/usr/bin vs /usr/libexec/git-core" and I planned to put "git --exec-path" in my PATH. But I gave the new way a try, and I have not been very bothered. So let me say that I really don't care much what happens with libexec, and you can hold me to that when the next flame-war breaks out if such a change is implemented. Now you have three opinions. :) I really was just concerned that we are rejecting legitimate, popular concerns because of a grumpy "you missed the deadline" stance, when perhaps there is a good reason (which I am still waiting to hear) that those concerns missed the deadline. -Peff -- 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
| Hiten Pandya | Re: up? (emacs docbook xml ide) |
| Martin Michlmayr | Network slowdown due to CFS |
| Greg KH | [GIT PATCH] driver core patches against 2.6.24 |
| Tarkan Erimer | Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 |
git: | |
| Christos Zoulas | Re: Boot device confusion |
| Manuel Bouyer | Re: NFSv3 bug |
| Anders Magnusson | Re: setsockopt() compat issue |
| Martin Husemann | Re: Compressed vnd handling tested successfully |
