Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > None of these suggestions, in isolation or in conjunction, seem big enough > to me to warrant a new iteration; I just offer them here in case you want > to iterate on the patch. If you want to keep the patch as-is, I am totally > on board with that. Everything other than "prefer repeated use of -C instead of a single subshell in there" (which I think worsens readability, even though it may save one process), I agree with your suggestions. Thanks.
