Robert Schiele <rschiele@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Aug 19, 2008 at 10:49:53AM +0200, Johannes Sixt wrote: > >> Why not just revert 5b8e6f85f (shrink git-shell)? It was a nice try. If it >> had not proved as a maintainance burden, it would have had merits. But who >> these days cares whether git-shell takes 300K or 30K in the light of that >> it goes out of the way anyway by execing some other process at the first >> opportunity? > > Sounds reasonable to me. Doing this in a clean way would require more > restructuring in the code. So far this change started a chain of changes > where each change tried to solve one issue and caused a more severe one. > > Though it would not only be 5b8e6f85 to be reverted but also 78568448 that > tried to fix up problems that 5b8e6f85 caused. I have no issue with that. Some people also mumbled about auditability, which I did not find particularly convincing. -- 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
