From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Felipe Contreras Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Add core.mode configuration Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:31:19 -0500 Message-ID: <525ee9872ab50_3983c19e7c27@nysa.notmuch> 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> <525e0e1b28c87_81a151de743f@nysa.notmuch> <20131016070900.GC24964@shrek.podlesie.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: John Szakmeister , git@vger.kernel.org To: Krzysztof Mazur , Felipe Contreras X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Oct 16 21:38:40 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 1VWWvU-0007vF-A4 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 21:38:36 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761220Ab3JPTic (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Oct 2013 15:38:32 -0400 Received: from mail-ob0-f178.google.com ([209.85.214.178]:60874 "EHLO mail-ob0-f178.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761138Ab3JPTic (ORCPT ); Wed, 16 Oct 2013 15:38:32 -0400 Received: by mail-ob0-f178.google.com with SMTP id uz6so1034798obc.37 for ; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 12:38:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qKMTmSV84IbKeyHyUoKv/OHz6LFQHJpzXr01D3PeuQI=; b=R2rzEAdpqRPpWdRkuL5XEcnGjw4A7CygpXV7IuSaSUiLZqeMUTItAnJywwZYvwQjwL XnCShYsqR9O+eWOH4R+0DhwlSM9v1fQNyQHrJdnrmDV5QekfAx/aqgFbOzlGZnlZTymr jApP7ZHegxx8XE0y6k2bYbdkqZAZkEJn9XNJ6Lx7lJ6tiE9hZzkP71cvNkaOkiURBhof ldkdBCZOgTMeuPAg77MKd25n2nlaUSz6MdeYBuEqLWLR6Y33DO/B2lLfF1Qe2yLRP1zQ t9+gzvhFmETAb+gGUGtYuVb8/y1v77rD/cJIBZqyVswVN8QV3eE3GABfc3Wce7DoTm9g bwbw== X-Received: by 10.182.55.38 with SMTP id o6mr6940928obp.26.1381952311628; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 12:38:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (187-162-140-241.static.axtel.net. [187.162.140.241]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id z5sm65365983obg.13.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Wed, 16 Oct 2013 12:38:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20131016070900.GC24964@shrek.podlesie.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Krzysztof Mazur wrote: > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 10:55:07PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > John Szakmeister wrote: > > > > > > I like the idea that we could kick git into a mode that applies the > > > behaviors we're talking about having in 2.0, but I'm concerned about > > > one aspect of it. Not having these behaviors until 2.0 hits means > > > we're free to renege on our decisions in favor of something better, or > > > to pull out a bad idea. But once we insert this knob, I don't know > > > that we have the same ability. Once people realize it's there and > > > start using it, it gets harder to back out. I guess we could maintain > > > the stance that "the features are not concrete yet," or something like > > > that, but I think people would still get upset if something changes > > > out from under them. > > > > We cannot change the behavior of push.default = simple already, so at least > > that option is not in question. > > If we add core.addremove=true the same applies to it - we cannot remove > it later, the only we can do is to disable it by default in future > versions after testing (core.addremove=true or core.mode=next). That is true, but adding core.addremove = true would probably imply there's the option of adding core.addremove = false. > > > So, at the end of the day, I'm just not sure it's worthwhile to have. > > > > This is exactly what happened on 1.6; nobody really tested the 'git foo' > > behavior, so we just switched from one version to the next. If you are not > > familiar with the outcome; it wasn't good. > > BTW, I'm still using pre-1.6 git-foo, I have /usr/libexec/git-core > in my PATH. So I would like to always have an option to disable some > new incompatible "improvements". That's what core.addremove = false would do, wouldn't it? > > So I say we shouldn't just provide warnings, but also have an option to allow > > users (probably a minority) to start testing this. > > > > and an option to keep the old behavior, like we did with push.default. Ditto. -- Felipe Contreras