From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [RFC, PATCH] git send-email: Make --no-chain-reply-to the default Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:29:42 +0100 Message-ID: <20091110182942.GA15677@elte.hu> References: <1257786206-9208-1-git-send-email-mitake@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp> <1257789555.4108.348.camel@laptop> <20091110040847.GC29454@elte.hu> <7v4op3gd6f.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20091110071927.GB11942@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Peter Zijlstra , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Nov 10 19:30:04 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1N7vTe-0007xo-BT for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:30:02 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757528AbZKJS3v (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:29:51 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1757508AbZKJS3v (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:29:51 -0500 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:49881 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752693AbZKJS3u (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 Nov 2009 13:29:50 -0500 Received: from elvis.elte.hu ([157.181.1.14]) by mx2.mail.elte.hu with esmtp (Exim) id 1N7vTP-0006NE-US from ; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:29:53 +0100 Received: by elvis.elte.hu (Postfix, from userid 1004) id C30053E22E0; Tue, 10 Nov 2009 19:29:38 +0100 (CET) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20091110071927.GB11942@elte.hu> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) Received-SPF: neutral (mx2.mail.elte.hu: 157.181.1.14 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of elte.hu) client-ip=157.181.1.14; envelope-from=mingo@elte.hu; helo=elvis.elte.hu; X-ELTE-SpamScore: 0.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=0.0 required=5.9 tests=none autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 _SUMMARY_ Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: * Ingo Molnar wrote: > * Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > [Footnote] > > > > *1* To spell it out... The people who are in the "hate > > chain-reply-to very much" camp would have already done their own > > configuration to get the behaviour they want by now, so changing the > > default would not help them much, while potentially hurting "love > > chain-reply-to" people who have been content because they got what > > they wanted without setting any configuration. > > Stupid question: i researched the Git mailing list archive (and read > the link you provided) and found no arguments (at all) in favor of the > nested chaining. Are you aware of any? Btw., dont get me wrong - i'm perfectly happy with the fix in 1.7.0. You are also right that behavioral changes dont belong into stable releases. ( I'm just seeing this problem through the biased eyes of someone who is affected by it, so i naturally want to have the benefit of the change ASAP - without fully perceiving the risks of the change.) Thanks, Ingo