Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > I thought we already rejected the "install symlink" in the > earlier round. Am I mistaken, or are there any compelling new > reasons to revisit it? Uh, perhaps I have a patchy recollection, but what I remember is that Scho argued that one might use something like xstow or a package manager instead, and I replied that a) this required the installation of additional software for a simple task. b) if the software worked using symbolic links, it would not know at what level to make the links (namely create /usr/local/share/man/man1 and link every file from /opt/git/share/man/man1, but link the directory /usr/local/share/git-core directly to /opt/git/share/git-core). I don't remember a conclusive reply to that. Not seeing the patch appear either, I decided to clean it up, remove the objection of using the GNU-specific -mindepth option, and properly document the usage. Since the stuff is strictly an additional convenience not impacting any of the existing targets, I would not have thought it terribly controversial. If I have misinterpreted or misremembered part of the discussion, I apologize. No harm was intended. In any case, some people might want to make use of the polished patch series even if it is not applied to git.git. Is there a place other than the git list where one can provide patches that are not likely to end up in git.git? Thanks, -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum - 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
