From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] Make setup_work_tree() return new prefix Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:53:48 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: <20080227163902.GA28058@laptop> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Feb 28 16:55:38 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JUl61-0002kW-AL for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:54:57 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759988AbYB1PyV (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:54:21 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1759285AbYB1PyV (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:54:21 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:36579 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1758723AbYB1PyU (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Feb 2008 10:54:20 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 28 Feb 2008 15:54:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [138.251.11.74]) [138.251.11.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp023) with SMTP; 28 Feb 2008 16:54:18 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+Yix5lkYqYd5oIFjMinJCna8YpwFOwmW52bZngdB hiQmykiBM5tlI0 X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (LSU 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Thu, 28 Feb 2008, Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy wrote: > On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 6:30 PM, Johannes Schindelin > wrote: > > > I am sorry, but with all these intrusive changes, I get a very uneasy > > feeling. As uneasy as with the original series, which I tried to fix > > up, not really succeeding. > > In constrast I feel good :) To me setup_git_directory*() at the end look > really nice. No chdir() all over the place (temporary chdir() for > detecting .git does not count). It also gives a chance to get rid of > worktree to commands that do not care about worktree at all. Well, I'll have to review your patches in depth, then. Which will take some days, because I wanted to submit builtin-remote first. Ciao, Dscho