Re: [PATCH] Move all dashed form git commands to libexecdir

> On Thu, Nov 29, 2007 at 08:13:04PM -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
> 
>>> My point is that (2) is already implemented for every program (shell or
>>> no) which understands filename completion, and there is a proposal for
>>> taking it away. I would consider that, except I haven't see any claimed
>>> advantages except that the hardlinks are awful under Windows.
>> Weren't enough complaints about Git having waaaaaaaaaaay too many 
>> commands?  Didn't those complaints come about often enough already?
>>
>> 	$ git-[tab]
>> 	Display all 135 possibilities? (y or n)
> 
> Go back and read the thread to which you are responding. I am _not_
> arguing against moving those commands to $(libexecdir) where no sane
> user will ever see them. That change addresses the issue you are talking
> about.
> 
> I _am_ arguing against removing them entirely, for those of us who want
> to go to the trouble of enabling this (by putting a non-standard entry
> into our PATH). Because the issue you are talking about will already
> have been dealt with, it is no longer a compelling reason to remove the
> hardlinks entirely.
> 
> The only reason I have heard to remove them entirely is that Windows
> doesn't properly support hardlinks, which I addressed in my other mails
> (and to which I have seen no rebuttal).
>