Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > ..., "./gitcvs.git" would work (in the odd case where you actually have a > bare repository sitting in your working directory), ... This is a bit of tangent, because it does not change the issue we are discussing, and I suspect you already know this. But to avoid future confusion by people on the list who read this in the archive... "foo.git" does _NOT_ mean the directory is a bare repository. It is perfectly normal to have "foo.git/" that has a working tree whose repository data lives in "foo.git/.git". I _think_ (meaning, I haven't polled the userbase) requiring '/' may not break people's existing setup too badly, while it _is_ a regression in the sense that we suddenly start disallowing something we allowed for a long time, perhaps without no apparent good reason. I hope you'll correct me about "without no apparent good reason" part, which was what I was asking in my previous message. With a good rationale, it is much easier to sell a change that is a regression in the strictest sense but is unlikely to hurt people in practice. - 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
