Re: [PATCH 1/2] hard-code the empty tree object
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Feb 15, 2008, 18:25 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20080215182542.GA25167@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vhcgaglq5.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 09:42:26AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> > Should I re-send, or do you want to just markup the existing patches? > > Shouldn't the previous one that uses the hardcoded empty tree > object name good enough that is already on 'pu'?
Yes, they are fine (I hadn't looked at them that carefully before, but it looks like you cleaned up the ordering sensibly already).
The last paragraph in the commit message of the add--interactive patch should be removed (the implementation is no longer "hack-ish").
-Peff