On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 07:11:04PM +0200, Jens Lehmann wrote: > Am 07.08.2013 20:28, schrieb Fredrik Gustafsson: > > On Tue, Aug 06, 2013 at 02:11:56PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> Thanks, will replace the top two commits and queue. Looks like we > >> are getting ready for 'next'? > > > > I'm a bit curious about if we should move towards a reentrent libgit > > (which would for example make multithreading easier) or not. > > I'm not aware of such an effort in core Git (I always thought that > libgit2 is the project doing what you seem to aim for). > > > If so, I suggest that this patch only use die() in builtin/. However I > > know that there's a lot of die() all over libgit today, I'm curious > > about what direction we're heading. > > The die() calls are just one part. Global variables are another issue, > we have memory which is implicitly freed on exit ... so unless we > commit ourselves to fix all those issues I see no point in moving the > die() calls into builtin/ in my series.
Okay, thanks for your answer. -- Med vänliga hälsningar Fredrik Gustafsson tel: 0733-608274 e-post: iv...@iveqy.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
