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 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 415DAC433E0 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 18:33:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F31DC206F1 for ; Tue, 26 May 2020 18:33:21 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="pDBR8Kjl" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730210AbgEZSdU (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 May 2020 14:33:20 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:63827 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1728113AbgEZSdU (ORCPT ); Tue, 26 May 2020 14:33:20 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B435675577; Tue, 26 May 2020 14:33:19 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=WEnkJxKJoImhaSL+EJtzZMztduo=; b=pDBR8K jl5BIaUr9C2rtDEKjFlwyUyTlIiU11p6uAcHN11W6xkxegc8G3QrAG4fl2jvEcfc 7UReAfEzYgWOxwNYAjbFfW75pyMbReQ8zCLS31bBFYy+ebodyg90J9SPLqG/sFtv pKjq5pQaxCF3Aa/wTfF48wbn/D73LCeH7uptw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=dilqdhC653uzpBT+owfS7nEK3F8SsXSJ X6J1d5oFKLHpKsPV4YQ5U/BK9lXt1JBx6zOL736TcD2XWPapTMo52RgUQhQWWi0b tJIhUdNpInkgq8QLPXW4/fdyi8GC0oxMB5Tq75BIVTNyNxqUOtL6ddZnZ5q6nTWA pMt8+twuHQY= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5F3A75576; Tue, 26 May 2020 14:33:19 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.231.104.69]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1DD0C75575; Tue, 26 May 2020 14:33:19 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: ydirson@free.fr Cc: git Subject: Re: [BUG] diff algorithm selection issue References: <505382066.1036329918.1590513687177.JavaMail.root@zimbra39-e7> Date: Tue, 26 May 2020 11:33:18 -0700 In-Reply-To: <505382066.1036329918.1590513687177.JavaMail.root@zimbra39-e7> (ydirson@free.fr's message of "Tue, 26 May 2020 19:21:27 +0200 (CEST)") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 5EFA99D4-9F7F-11EA-A65C-C28CBED8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org ydirson@free.fr writes: >> Or is it rather intended to be `--diff-algorithm=default --minimal`, >> whatever the default may be in the future ? > > Now that I think about it, do we really want "minimal" as a valid choice > for --diff-algorithm, if it's not a choice of algorithm ? I asked the same question to myself before writing my first response but it is way too late to ask it now. I do support the spirit of "--minimal", but not "--diff-algorithm=minimal" which may be an ill-thought-out shorthand for "--diff-algorithm=default --minimal". If you dig the list archive, I would imagine that you would find that not an insignificant part of list participant back then thought it was a good idea ;-)