From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] push: shorten "push.default is unset" warning message Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2016 05:11:15 -0500 Message-ID: <20160224101115.GA20807@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <000001530ea408ed-2b71a34a-32bb-434c-bba5-fdac28193e9c-000000@eu-west-1.amazonses.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Matthieu Moy , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Feb 24 11:11:29 2016 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 1aYWPn-0005Uh-Mn for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 11:11:28 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751750AbcBXKLU (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Feb 2016 05:11:20 -0500 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:48165 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751512AbcBXKLS (ORCPT ); Wed, 24 Feb 2016 05:11:18 -0500 Received: (qmail 27439 invoked by uid 102); 24 Feb 2016 10:11:18 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 05:11:18 -0500 Received: (qmail 6690 invoked by uid 107); 24 Feb 2016 10:11:26 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 24 Feb 2016 05:11:26 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 24 Feb 2016 05:11:15 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Feb 23, 2016 at 11:05:08AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > If most people are happy with "simple" (and certainly that was the > assumption and hope behind the transtion we made at 2.0), we may be > better off removing the warning altogether. Keeping "and adopt the > new behaviour" part pretends to be offering a chance to make an > informed choice, but it will forever be unclear to the non-reader > what the implication of not adopting the new behaviour is anyway, so > overall we won't see reduced hits at stackoverflow with this change. Yeah, this was my first thought on seeing Matthieu's patch. We inserted that message to tell people about the impending change, and to catch any stragglers even after the change had happened. At some point it simply becomes obsolete history. I dunno if that time is now or not. v2.3.0 (which actually flipped the switch) is only a year old, but we've been showing the message since v1.8.0, which is over 3 years old. Even Debian stable is way beyond that. :) So my inclination is to just rip out the warning entirely. -Peff