I (like many others) use symlinks as an effective way of sharing code+assets between multiple projects. Unity had already intentionally disabled them on OSX, and now they did it on Windows too. They still haven't said why they are disabled, other than that they "cause problems".
If you're going to take out symlinks, then please replace them with ANY way of actually sharing code between multiple projects.
I've created a Unity Feedback request here, please vote if this is important to you: http://feedback.unity3d.com/unity/al...windows-and-os
Is there release notes/new features list anywhere?
If hardlinks can work, why can't symlinks? Why intentionally disable them? Hardlinks can cause other issues, and it's worth noting that hardlinks are disabled on OSX by default. There's a whole thread discussing this: http://forum.unity3d.com/threads/104...Unity-Projects
What's your use case? Are you just saving a bunch of textures and models from being duplicated? I think in that case, you just put them all in a folder and use a junction point to stick that in the asset folder. A junction point works at the NTFS level, and can't be disabled.
If you're doing things individually using shortcuts, then I have no real solution.
I'm working on an open-source library for Unity (http://struct.ca/futile).
I want to be able to use the *exact same code* in a few different projects, and if I notice any problems or want to tweak anything in the library code, I want to be able to fix it right away, and then commit those changes back to git. Git submodules won't work because the repo has other things in it (sample projects, etc.), and git doesn't support checking out only part of a repo.
Linking to external libraries in external folders is a very common use case, most other frameworks support it.
Again, what I have right now is working great, Unity is about to take something that is working great for me, and remove it with zero explanation, and somehow they have the gall to call it an "improvement".
Sorry - was just trying to help, I don't work for Unity, and I have no clue why they want to remove them, but I assume there must be some reason or they wouldn't do it. Still, It seems like a junction point would work fine in place of a symlink for your usage, though of course they only work on NTFS. Maybe someone from Unity will jump in.
I ran into this problem when I switched from a windows dev machine to os x, I was depending on symlinks and had to switch over to using rsync to manually keep shared code in sync.
Hey, I know this was posted a while ago I got the tweet about the feedback page on symlinks MattRix, so I did a little digging. Jonas has commented on the feedback page giving a little more info.