Jeff King wrote:
> I already mentioned elsewhere that I think it would be fine to massage
> libgit.a in that direction. I even joined the conversation pointing out
> some cases where Felipe's ruby module would break. But I do not think
> that moving code in and out of libgit.a is an important first step at
> all. That is simply code that no library users would want to call, and
> is easy to deal with: move it out. The hard part is code that users
> _would_ want to call, and is totally broken. Patches dealing with that
> are the hard obstacle that people working in this direction would need
> to overcome. But I do not see any such patches under discussion.

Forget the rest; this makes it clear.  Thanks, and sorry for all the confusion.

So, reorganization is not the first step.  Can you please post an
example patch illustrating what needs to be done, so we can follow?
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to