Dustin Spicuzza <dustin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Yes, your interpretation is exactly correct, even the interpretation of > the uncertainty of the message. > > I didn't send the patch to this list though, not sure why gitgitgadget > decided to do so (I've never heard of it before now). The patch was > originally submitted to git for windows (PR #938), with an even worse > commit message. :) The credit goes to Dscho, making effort to slim down patches Git for Windows carries on top of my tree by upstreaming them.
