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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).