Patrick Steinhardt <ps@xxxxxx> writes: > If this is proving to be a blocker we can also change upstream to not be > a separate project. What do "upstream" refer to in this sentence? Meson? If you are talking about "gitk" and/or "git-gui", then such an alternative version of these patches would not change the picture an iota, wrt "the limitation of the tool should not force the sources that might consider using the tool to pay the price---which might be proving to be a blocker", no? Not that I am saying it _is_ a blocker. But the above sounds like making things worse for no gain, so I must be misunderstanding what you meant X-<. So, ... confused.
