From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: David Aguilar <davvid@gmail.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Scott Chacon <schacon@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2025, #05; Fri, 17)
Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 11:23:20 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq5xm80y53.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Z43y0mNhHsEdF22L@gmail.com> (David Aguilar's message of "Sun, 19 Jan 2025 22:53:06 -0800")
David Aguilar <davvid@gmail.com> writes:
> (The text below is from the original thread; sorry I don't have it handy
> so I just replied here instead)
>
>> ... but would it be simpler if we made it an extended boolean, i.e.
>>
>> true, yes, on, 1 -> same as "immediate"
>> false, no, off, 0 -> same as "never"
>> immediate -> same as what we currently do
>> never -> same as what we currently do
>> prompt -> same as what we currently do
>> number -> same as what we currently do
>
> I do think that, "0 -> same as never," makes a lot of sense from a
> usability perspective.
I obviously do not agree. "Suggest the right spelling and let the
user decide without time-bomb" is a very useful and safe UI, and the
above summary was done by mistake.
> I would instead recommend that, "1 -> same as prompt," would be a safer
> and less surprising behavior. If the user wants "immediate" they can be
> explicit about it. "immediate" is the most dangerous of all of these
> options so adding ambiguous routes to it seems like a step backwards.
Thanks for raising your concern.
As somebody who does *not* use the time-bomb UI that makes me wait
when the heuristics guessed correctly and forces me to scramble to
hit \C-c when it didn't, I am not qualified to comment in favor of
such a huge behaviour change, so I won't, and let others discuss.
> I don't really think backwards-compatibility is much of a concern here
> at all. It *would* be a concern if we were moving from a safe behavior
> to a less-safe behavior (like this patch currently does) but not so in
> the other direction like I'm proposing by making "1" mean "prompt".
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2025-01-21 19:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2025-01-18 0:42 What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2025, #05; Fri, 17) Junio C Hamano
2025-01-18 13:15 ` Jeff King
2025-01-18 17:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-01-19 12:51 ` Jeff King
2025-01-19 12:55 ` Jeff King
2025-01-21 19:17 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-01-20 6:53 ` David Aguilar
2025-01-20 7:54 ` [PATCH] help: make help.autocorrect = 1 the same as "prompt" David Aguilar
2025-01-21 19:23 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2025-01-21 20:19 ` What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2025, #05; Fri, 17) Derrick Stolee
2025-01-21 20:30 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-01-22 18:30 ` Taylor Blau
2025-01-22 22:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-01-23 23:05 ` Taylor Blau
2025-01-23 23:46 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-01-22 16:44 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-01-22 17:28 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-01-22 17:38 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-01-23 17:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-01-23 17:45 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2025-01-23 18:25 ` Junio C Hamano
2025-01-24 11:05 ` Karthik Nayak
2025-01-24 17:06 ` Junio C Hamano
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=xmqq5xm80y53.fsf@gitster.g \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=davvid@gmail.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=schacon@gmail.com \
/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).