Re: [RFC] require-work-tree wants more than what its name says
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- May 4, 2011, 15:42 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vliymfp4t.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20110504073850.GA8512@sigill.intra.peff.net>
Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> ... but I worry about compatibility. We can audit our in-tree scripts, > but git-sh-setup is part of the recommended API for external scripts, > no?
I am Ok with renaming the thing to "require_work_tree_exists", and all the worry will go away.