From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2008 18:25:42 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] hard-code the empty tree object
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