From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Krzysztof Mazur Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Add core.mode configuration Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 00:01:25 +0200 Message-ID: <20131015220125.GA14021@shrek.podlesie.net> References: <1381561485-20252-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <20131014205908.GA17089@shrek.podlesie.net> <525c63b6711fa_197a905e845b@nysa.notmuch> <20131015123505.GA3097@shrek.podlesie.net> <525d35e766ad4_55661275e7426@nysa.notmuch> <20131015133327.GA22723@shrek.podlesie.net> <525d4354a5436_5844e73e843d@nysa.notmuch> <20131015145139.GA3977@shrek.podlesie.net> <525d8ebd19c67_5feab61e8037@nysa.notmuch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Felipe Contreras X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Oct 16 00:01:33 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VWCgH-0001Vx-1a for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 00:01:33 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S933769Ab3JOWB3 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Oct 2013 18:01:29 -0400 Received: from shrek-wifi.podlesie.net ([93.179.225.50]:40389 "EHLO shrek.podlesie.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932802Ab3JOWB2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 15 Oct 2013 18:01:28 -0400 Received: by shrek.podlesie.net (Postfix, from userid 603) id 2AD2278; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 00:01:25 +0200 (CEST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <525d8ebd19c67_5feab61e8037@nysa.notmuch> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 01:51:41PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > I don't see what is the problem. We haven't had the need for push.default = > simplewarning, have we? If you want the warning, you don't change anything, if simplewarning makes no sense, because push.default=simple sets exact behavior, not some "next" behavior that may change in future. For instance, I was very unhappy once, when git pull failed and said that I should do git pull --merge. > you want to specify something, you already know what you are doing. > > > Maybe we should also add core.mode=next-warn that changes defaults like next > > but keeps warnings enabled until the user accepts that change by setting > > appropriate config option? > > Maybe, but would you actually use that option? No. > > > That's safer than next (at least for interactive use) and maybe more users > > would use that, but I don't think that's worth adding. > > Maybe, but I don't think many users would use either mode, and that's good. > > > For me, old behavior by default and warnings with information how to > > enable new incompatible features, is sufficient. So I don't need > > core.mode option, but as long it will be useful for other users I have > > nothing against it. > > OK, but that seems to mean you don't need core.mode = next-warn either. I'm not > against adding such a mode, but I would like to hear about _somebody_ that > would like to actually use it. I don't like to program for ghosts. > As I said earlier, I don't think that next-warn it's worth adding, but such option might increase the number of people interested in the core.mode. Krzysiek