Greg Brockman wrote: > Haha, ok. Any rules of thumb for how long to wait until resending > everything is appropriate? Not that I know of. Just imagine yourself on the receiving end: will the resent patches be a welcome relief from the work of digging up the old ones, or will it be adding to a daunting torrent of incoming mail? However: - When patches have changed greatly since the previous round, there is no easy alternative for continuing discussion beyond sending the re-rolled series. - When the patches are finally in good enough shape to be pulled, there is no way to have an on-list copy of the version merged available except to resend. So in those circumstances, one tends to resend without hesitation. >> Patch 1 still uses execv(), which is not available on Windows. > > It seems to me that the existing git-shell calls execv_git_cmd, which > uses execvp internally. I know ~nothing about exec on Windows, but > presumably it doesn't have just one of execv or execvp. See compat/mingw.h. > If it does, > it would be easy enough to switch the execv to execvp, as the commands > that are being run are already guaranteed to have a slash. Yes. > Not yet. My $project has deployed an earlier prototype of the patches > in our dev environment, but we haven't moved it to prod yet. We'll > probably do that next week. Thanks for the update. Hope that helps, Jonathan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html