On Wed, 2008-08-27 at 16:38 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted text
> The discussion in this thread was about how to go forward from here, now

> the transition is over.  One of the future directions the transition was

> aiming at was removal of git-foo form for built-ins even from the libexec

> area -- I was complaining about David's beating an offtopic dead horse in

> the above, because it was throwing the thread in an off-track direction,

> distracting everybody from discussing what was more important, discussing

> constructively if/how to proceed from here.

I'm sorry you feel that way. The reason I didn't object back then was

almost certainly because I didn't notice the discussion. I open the git

mailing list folder so infrequently I might as well not be subscribed. 
But even if I _had_ seen the discussion, I might not have replied.

Life's too short to undertake a reasoned critique of every crack-addled

'plan' you see on the Internet. I'm not going to bother arguing with the

next person who asserts that we should turn Linux into a microkernel and

write it in C++, and I would have treated some idiotic plan to break git

in this way with just the same level of interest.
> Now the primary topic of what to do about built-ins have already settled.

quoted text
> We _will_ keep git-foo commands in the libexec area.  We won't be removing

> them.

Excellent. All we need to do is make sure the distributions all set

$(gitexecdir) to /usr/bin when they upgrade to 1.6.0 -- and could you

also fix it on master.kernel.org please?
I believe we currently have to override $(gitexecdir) at make time --

could we have it as an option to ./configure, please?
--

David Woodhouse                            Open Source Technology Centre

David.Woodhouse@intel.com                              Intel Corporation
--

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