Re: [PATCH] fast-(import|export): improve on the signature algorithm name

[Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com>]

On Thu, May 29, 2025 at 5:14 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > Personally, I kind of think abort makes more sense as the default --
> > at some point.
>
> Oh, of course.
>
> > So I'm curious if you've just changed your mind
> > completely from before and are against changing the default at all,
>
> Yes, after seeing that the representation of the signature algorithm
> and encapsulation format was not as well thought out as I thought it
> would already be and its design still being discussed, I realized
> that the new feature was way premature to have in the release.  At
> some point, when things mature and we are reasonably sure we will
> not have to make incompatible changes in the data stream, we might
> need to switch, and the best default might turn out to be to refuse
> to work unless the end-user makes an explicit choice, but as the
> design of the feature stands now, I have a feeling that it is a bit
> premature.  Certainly not ready for general consumption.

Discouraging the use of the feature and saying it's highly
experimental should hint that the default might change in the future,
but maybe we should explicitly say so?

> Of course, I could have just reverted the merge of the original
> topic and give it a chance for a fresh restart the next cycle, but a
> new feature clearly marked "highly experimental" would hopefully set
> the end-user expectation straight, as long as the default is "do not
> do anything different from before", which is the safest choice for a
> feature whose design is still wobbly.

Yeah, I agree with this approach in general.