Re: [PATCH] technical doc: add a design doc for the evolve command

[Stefan Xenos <sxenos@google.com>]

>   I don't have a strong opinion about whether this would go in the
> design doc.  I suppose the doc could have an "implementation plan"
> section describing temporary stopping points on the way to the final
> result, but it's not necessary to include that.

As long as this is something I'm just doing for fun and nobody needs
to coordinate anything with me, I was planning to just document the
endpoint and then work on whatever seems interesting at any given
moment. Of course, if I found a job/team that would let me do this as
my day job, I'd be more willing to commit to deliverables.

  - Stefan
On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 5:33 PM Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Stefan Xenos wrote:
> > Jonathan Nieder wrote:
>
> >> putting it in the commit message is a way to
> >> experiment with the workflow without changing the object format
> >
> > As long as we're talking about a temporary state of affairs for users
> > that have opted in, and we're explicit about the fact that future
> > versions of git won't understand the change graphs that are produced
> > during that temporary state of affairs, I'm fine with using the commit
> > message. We can move it to the header prior to enabling the feature by
> > default.
>
> Yay!  I think that addresses both my and Ævar's concerns.  Also, if
> you run into an issue that requires changing the object format
> earlier, that's fine and we can handle the situation when it comes.
>
> I don't have a strong opinion about whether this would go in the
> design doc.  I suppose the doc could have an "implementation plan"
> section describing temporary stopping points on the way to the final
> result, but it's not necessary to include that.
>
> Thanks for the quick and thoughtful replies.
>
> Jonathan