From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
To: Krzysztof Mazur <krzysiek@podlesie.net>,
Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Add core.mode configuration
Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2013 16:35:50 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <525c63b6711fa_197a905e845b@nysa.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131014205908.GA17089@shrek.podlesie.net>
Krzysztof Mazur wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2013 at 02:04:45AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> > So that we can specify general modes of operation, specifically, add the
> > 'next' mode, which makes Git pre v2.0 behave as Git v2.0.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
> > ---
>
> I don't think that single option it's a good idea. From the user's
> point of view I think that the way push.default was introduced and
> will be changed is much better. So maybe it's better to just add
> "core.addremove" option instead?
Maybe, but what happens when we start doing changes for v3.0? As a user, I
don't and to figure out which are the new configurations that will turn v3.0
behavior on, I just want to be testing that mode, even if I'm not following Git
development closely. If I find something annoying with core.mode = next, I
report the problem to the mailing list, which is good, we want to know problems
with the backward-incompatible changes that will be introduced before it's too
late, don't we?
I'd be fine with having *both* a fine-tuned option to trigger each specific
behavior, and another one that turns all those fine-tuned options on that are
meant for v2.0.
Unfortunately, I don't see much interest from Git developers in either.
--
Felipe Contreras
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-14 21:45 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-12 7:04 [PATCH v3] Add core.mode configuration Felipe Contreras
2013-10-14 20:59 ` Krzysztof Mazur
2013-10-14 21:35 ` Felipe Contreras [this message]
2013-10-15 12:35 ` Krzysztof Mazur
2013-10-15 12:32 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-10-15 13:33 ` Krzysztof Mazur
2013-10-15 13:29 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-10-15 14:51 ` Krzysztof Mazur
2013-10-15 16:59 ` John Szakmeister
2013-10-16 3:55 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-10-16 7:09 ` Krzysztof Mazur
2013-10-16 19:31 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-10-16 10:54 ` John Szakmeister
2013-10-16 15:11 ` John Szakmeister
2013-10-16 19:57 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-10-16 19:32 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-10-16 22:02 ` Philip Oakley
2013-10-16 23:06 ` Jonathan Nieder
2013-10-17 19:48 ` Philip Oakley
2013-10-17 21:08 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-10-15 18:51 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-10-15 22:01 ` Krzysztof Mazur
2013-10-16 4:03 ` Felipe Contreras
2013-10-16 6:34 ` Krzysztof Mazur
2013-10-16 19:28 ` Felipe Contreras
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=525c63b6711fa_197a905e845b@nysa.notmuch \
--to=felipe.contreras@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=krzysiek@podlesie.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.