From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] fsck: do not print dangling objects by default Date: Mon, 27 Feb 2012 11:29:53 -0800 Message-ID: <7vr4xg6pn2.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20120226204357.GA26088@ecki> <7vty2ddzqj.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <7vhayddxgp.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20120227191846.GB1600@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Clemens Buchacher , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 27 20:30:02 2012 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 1S26Gm-00012f-MX for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 20:30:01 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754084Ab2B0T35 (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:29:57 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:48788 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753996Ab2B0T34 (ORCPT ); Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:29:56 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A92B6E83; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:29:55 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=orkaUlpVEbHIVQ/nvp2UmopWcuk=; b=kZsYOb gSMsLjNjAE7XDaEpk+6p8BTjmdA5LsIE32vInSwFrrSHRrRXkxM86x34eWIPkpoY UPm/wJzPtvMmoAyy8Kzq5wUpljYb3qmU0uwB0LPc/7i5zQgzPJW/nRFR8cAjV1zC OteczeLxQkSXBVzddqQxxhPmDG4U76NsrQNXc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=DupgFZH3j3VAWWaPW+6r8/Z1gCa+uKs2 3h8WHw0GLvl7JkzFmySbibFzGmDj+ywcx/w0Agp4IIst8rajsUpRR4FRxEs0rgU/ z9TawY5RokHLNLDKTZk3uJjEvT604VzDeduC17mstWJ5nhf5syBRtkj1botq//7s UL83iqWarsk= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 707206E82; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:29:55 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CAE1A6E7D; Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:29:54 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20120227191846.GB1600@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Mon, 27 Feb 2012 14:18:46 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 6D2CE48C-6179-11E1-9482-9DB42E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: >> Given that, isn't it not just sufficient but actually better to instead >> add a new --no-dangling option and keep the default unchanged? > > ... Of course, it is fsck, so I wonder how often clueless people are > really running it in the first place (i.e., it is not and should not be > part of most users' typical workflows). If it is simply the case that > they are being told to run "git fsck" by more expert users without > understanding what it does, then I could buy the argument that those > expert users could just as easily say "git fsck --no-dangling". Yes, that was certainly part of my pros-and-cons analysis. If you run "git fsck" without "--no-dangling" without reading the manual, you may get confused, but that is *not* the primary audience. People who are curious can read the manual and figure it out, and the need for "fsck" is much rarer these days, compared to 2005 ;-) In that context, only large downsides of potentially breaking and having to adjust existing scripts remains without much upsides, if we were to switch the default.