From: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks.im>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com>,
git@vger.kernel.org, Phillip Wood <phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] docs: fix repository-layout when building with breaking changes
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 07:35:05 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <Z8afGexTdlqDnPV8@pks.im> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <xmqqbjuivuzm.fsf@gitster.g>
On Mon, Mar 03, 2025 at 10:18:05AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> "Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
>
> > I copied the name from the test prerequisite as I didn't want to have
> > different names for condition used in the tests and documentation. I do
> > have some reservations about the naming though as it means we end up
> > having to use ifdef::!without-breaking-changes[] or test_expect_success
> > !WITHOUT_BREAKING_CHANGES to document and test breaking changes which is
> > a double negative.
>
> It was exactly the first thing that came to my mind when I saw the
> change to the Makefile in the patch. Unless our breaking changes
> are all removals, which is not likely to be the case in the longer
> term, "without-breaking-changes" would be an invitation for
> confusing double negatives.
I remember not quite being happy with the double-negation myself. I
don't mind renaming the prerequisite we have in our test suite for
consistency, as well, if you want to do that.
Patrick
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-03-04 6:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-03-03 16:11 [PATCH] docs: fix repository-layout when building with breaking changes Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2025-03-03 18:18 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-03-04 6:35 ` Patrick Steinhardt [this message]
2025-03-04 10:23 ` Phillip Wood
2025-03-04 16:04 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-03-05 10:42 ` [PATCH v2] " Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget
2025-03-05 15:53 ` [PATCH] docs: fix check-docs with WITH_BREAKING_CHANGES Junio C Hamano
2025-03-07 10:32 ` Phillip Wood
2025-03-07 15:07 ` Phillip Wood
2025-03-07 19:55 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-03-07 22:42 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-03-09 10:52 ` Phillip Wood
2025-03-09 10:52 ` Phillip Wood
2025-03-10 6:42 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-03-11 14:40 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-03-12 10:39 ` phillip.wood123
2025-03-12 13:43 ` Patrick Steinhardt
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=Z8afGexTdlqDnPV8@pks.im \
--to=ps@pks.im \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitgitgadget@gmail.com \
--cc=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=phillip.wood@dunelm.org.uk \
/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).