On Tue, Sep 09, 2008 at 02:38:31PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > My eyes are getting dry after looking at these s/git-/git / patches, so > please do not get offended if I leave these in my Inbox unread for a few > days. I did the same "look for conversion that should _not_ have occurred" check for these patches, and all look sane with two exceptions: - the cvsserver stuff that you mentioned - patch 4/6 changes the commit log message in a few cases for some "git svn" tests; presumably nothing is caring about the commit id's generated here, but I don't actually have svn installed to run the tests to be sure > So why don't we do this (not just for test but for documentation as well)? > > * We do not use "git foo" form when refering to the "server side > programs". Make it official; > > * We move "server side programs" in git(7) documentation into its > separate subsection; and > > * We always install "server side programs" in $(bindir). > > I think git-cvsserver is the last one we missed from the set of server > side programs (git-cvsserver, git-daemon, git-receive-pack, > git-upload-archive, git-upload-pack). That makes perfect sense to me. -Peff -- 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
