Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@xxxxxx> writes: > >> Apologies for proposing such large changes that late in the release cycle. >> Maybe we want to postpone the series until 1.6.0.1 or even 1.6.1. > > Well, from the cursory look, it does not seem to be 1.6.0.1 material, even > though it is possible to fork a topic at 1.6.0 and use the changes in > 'next', then 'master', and eventually to 'maint' to produce 1.6.0.X, if > all of this hapapens before 1.6.1. > > I wouldn't mind at all if the binary distribution on Windows is based on > "git.git plus port specific patchset that will eventually be sent > upstream" like it used to be. In fact it might even be preferrable, as I > won't be testing ports to that platform myself anyway. If the depth difference between /usr/libexec/git-cat-file and /bin/git is the major source of this headache, I do not think it is unreasonable for the mingw git port to use "gitexecdir=$(bindir)" layout by default. After all, Windows users do not really care where bulk of things are, as long as they see one single clickable icon on the desktop, don't they? -- 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
