Re: I want to release a "git-1.0"
- From
- Ryan Anderson <ryan@michonline.com>
- Date
- May 30, 2005, 22:19 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20050530221922.GC21076@mythryan2.michonline.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.58.0505301253070.1876@ppc970.osdl.org>
On Mon, May 30, 2005 at 01:00:42PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> > I think I'll move the "cvs2git" script thing to git proper before the 1.0 > release (again, in order to have the tutorial able to show what to do if > you already have an existing CVS tree), what else?
Umm, why do you maintain two seperate "git" related trees?
Why not merge all of git-tools in, in a tools/ subdirectory?
I've been meaning to ask the same question about "gitweb" for that matter. The distributions that want seperate packages for dependency reasons can handle that easily inside one tree, anyway, I believe.
I'd guess part of this is a holdover from the fact that you needed an independent tree for BitKeeper, but does it still make sense?
-- Ryan Anderson sometimes Pug Majere