From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 58D9AEE49B0 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 21:52:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S237075AbjHaVwT (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Aug 2023 17:52:19 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:42590 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229751AbjHaVwS (ORCPT ); Thu, 31 Aug 2023 17:52:18 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (pb-smtp20.pobox.com [173.228.157.52]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E296AB8 for ; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 14:52:15 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 812F821D18; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 17:52:15 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=iO0LqepUmR1fr9XWwsprmO+oIqCwreSuqY3i8v 2MxMA=; b=u3NiL2Kl2P/71pnTAufjpHGabQ/j+AtmxQpyHBOVpS26kV4prniDKZ 2Qk+wuEF6zhdRtnELkMR8spzH2spV1KEV8a+Dp4ppGj0K8cRFOuGFXZlOpubz6iS v+J+yeo/kTIubTOFNZOyuUHzcK73WVLf6Ec+AIvizDqMbzRjRQbsc= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7945F21D17; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 17:52:15 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.185.212.55]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A40EC21D16; Thu, 31 Aug 2023 17:52:11 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Wesley Schwengle Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] builtin/rebase.c: Emit warning when rebasing without a forkpoint In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Thu, 31 Aug 2023 13:57:13 -0700") References: <20230819203528.562156-1-wesleys@opperschaap.net> <20230819203528.562156-2-wesleys@opperschaap.net> Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2023 14:52:10 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: A3BB5DB8-4848-11EE-9120-F515D2CDFF5E-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > I am not commenting on the tests, as the above code probably needs > to be corrected first so that folks who want to squelch the message > and want the "forkpoint behaviour by default when rebuilding on the > usual upstream" behaviour can do so by setting the variable to true. > > And that obviously need to be tested, too. Another worrysome thing about rebase.forkpoint is that it will be inevitable for folks to start complaining that it does not work the way other configuration variables do. Setting the variable to 'true' is not the same as passing '--fork-point=true' from the command line. I actually think it would be a lot larger behaviour change with a huge potential to be received as a regression if we start making the variable to mean the same thing as passing '--fork-point=true'. People may like the current "if you are rebuilding your branch on its usual upstream, pay attention to the rebase and rewind of the upstream itself, but if you are giving an explicit upstream from the command line, the tool does not second guess you with the fork-point heuristics" behaviour and prefer to set it to true. We would be breaking them big time if suddenly the rebase.forkpoint=true they set previously starts triggering the fork-point heuristics when they run "git rebase upstream". So that needs to be kept in mind when/if we fix the "setting the variable, even to 'true', will squelch the warning".