From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from cloud.peff.net (cloud.peff.net [217.216.95.84]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BDBFF496D3B for ; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 20:11:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.216.95.84 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789071075; cv=none; b=kGoT6BwgzY8fui69mDG2Zuts+oy9jebmV1L9kmugQqWDXW3hSfbXLvXq0IyZxE4FI+ucF9CNF1YF9ENgCYXrBT/SXNQf0xo2oVS1Y1T7HLJRuf8xkzn+x9ZQApHpiXMdvbqta5EDhBFH+9JWyppo4qjUDhTNj1vxXBDFyo9IHvk= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1789071075; c=relaxed/simple; bh=5rInuPLyETE2tRBnxHWLf5Z4nMH2WukZ1SR1FcsRJ/M=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=IjQE1dWkA/wUAfhkjxQZP07dnCrHpyV4MYkeBf4ThqyiYNbizr9V8NIcIBAlvsyCWIgAlUQpaMzV6+ybMuZK5vi1+/Ddo7tJkd5Q6uKIf/zdB8STi0/v4jTzTF9VZp/z8CNBg/gktUJhjOwZmU44KDpgceSV/brtKwosF+vQ0kc= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=peff.net; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=peff.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=peff.net header.i=@peff.net header.b=QLWNvOn3; arc=none smtp.client-ip=217.216.95.84 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=reject dis=none) header.from=peff.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=peff.net Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=peff.net header.i=@peff.net header.b="QLWNvOn3" Received: (qmail 32763 invoked by uid 106); 10 Sep 2026 20:11:12 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=peff.net; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version:content-type:in-reply-to; s=20240930; bh=5rInuPLyETE2tRBnxHWLf5Z4nMH2WukZ1SR1FcsRJ/M=; b=QLWNvOn3lXwcb7GELV3nLkx4NqF7R7NCZ0tkhU/dXwX0PCNCt2l+e43s63Fbm/cobUIIW9c2swIQFLkMlCKsIbVBW4KIiWOf0hAzR7fgCn9nKe39Edx1lsn3A2adV5dSRsVF0DPLKCMNZqk6fBsqBrKXBqjLcR9IMdSBdKS5mMMFHw9yaazOE/s2qwknVjKbQ9tvKLo4V0dhPEa8XUhvT1sbB1X7sJmdiMxPJuYYrzRMQaxAVSVu9stqmP5LiLJKH4aiAIF9TDIaTRaslSsTvyTeLf6uhi8b1TrZzGhc6O19vdgMulu75h2ktAXFXY3B+t9qrOYAfTdrl73hlxvQfg== Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with ESMTP; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 20:11:12 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 161164 invoked by uid 111); 10 Sep 2026 20:11:11 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with (TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 encrypted) ESMTPS; Thu, 10 Sep 2026 16:11:11 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2026 16:11:11 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Vsevolod Myalitsin , git@vger.kernel.org, ben.knoble@gmail.com, gitster@pobox.me Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] advice: introduce advice scoping mechanism Message-ID: <20260910201111.GA919731@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <20270829004959.90983-1-ub4nal@mail.ru> <20260910085353.109373-1-ub4nal@mail.ru> <20260910085353.109373-3-ub4nal@mail.ru> <20260910155247.GA251185@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20260910190345.GA903701@coredump.intra.peff.net> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Sep 10, 2026 at 12:54:21PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > I kind of wonder if _all_ advice should just say "--global". I cannot > > think of an advice flag that is really repo specific. They are about > > silencing extra help because the _user_ understands the situation and > > wants Git to be less chatty. > > I think there are two things in play. > > * If applicability of a piece of advice depends on the workflow > employed, and a user who works on multiple projects that use > different workflows, set of advice messages may want to be > squelched per project, hence "--global" may not be appropriate. > > * "I, a physical single person, understand this piece of advice" is > inherently per user, so squelching a piece of advice that the > physical single person understands globally may make sense very > well. > > In hindsight, the latter argument should have been given more > weight, but I think the primary thinking back when we designed the > customizable advice messages was instead the former. Yeah, my contention is that the first thing doesn't really exist. But I admit I didn't carefully go through the list of advice looking for counter-examples. I'd be surprised if anybody really thought carefully about it, though. When I introduced advice.* in 2009 (geez, has it really been that long?) I had assumed people would just set it in their user config. The actual "git config" command advice came much later, but I don't see any discussion of global vs local in that thread: https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.548.git.1581311049547.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/ Amusingly that thread also touches on some of the "could we just convert everything to advise_if_enabled()" issues we've discussed here. I had zero recollection of it, despite participating. -Peff