On 20 Dec 2013, at 18:07, Tim Visher <[email protected]> wrote:

>> Is anyone aware of any specific reason(s) why symlinking om is a bad move?
> 
> Transitive dependencies?

Ah, excellent point, although Om currently only depends on cljs and clj.

Sam

---
http://sam.aaron.name

-- 
Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your 
first post.
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"ClojureScript" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojurescript.

Reply via email to