From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fout-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a5-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.148]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8401D19ABD8 for ; Mon, 15 Sep 2025 17:44:28 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.148 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757958270; cv=none; b=bp8cuUE7bzHGNcMqSpJTnhWP7Ha7U+pNcSYKh1dqZPBxDFuXsjgXu6Fe/QOIbXBiVyx3JWfUxz7UhWnQ1txrhVM+7fEMK1Krc4pU38nm9UUM++xnB+4WLqc55W3boFCQXXngGM+s7OUzqNv/JIdKmr7s8EtwIZuj5G1RZn2vHk0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1757958270; c=relaxed/simple; bh=PzC16XBR5LoiNNSWwKbxGsInxWTBja2W9f+WkiQqUH4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=VMsYGuGjLjCKDAKIdxnZadYoE65gAvdLnrRDcmTabDGmqRjeoNEUv+UadDL8n75nDqVWHjYUr79OS33muaAe8RmIpssTx2X4TX2I5nIcOcvoMi2xtT14kTN7RRUqFA8nIZnLcyHiBZwk/vIL7SUROP9ppo05ouVvZqaMrtQVrgQ= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b=CrW3IpIa; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=NOdRlt58; arc=none smtp.client-ip=103.168.172.148 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=pobox.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="CrW3IpIa"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="NOdRlt58" Received: from phl-compute-01.internal (phl-compute-01.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id AF70AEC01EC; Mon, 15 Sep 2025 13:44:27 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-01 ([10.202.2.160]) by phl-compute-01.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 15 Sep 2025 13:44:27 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=cc :cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from:in-reply-to :in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject :subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1757958267; x=1758044667; bh=PzC16XBR5L oiNNSWwKbxGsInxWTBja2W9f+WkiQqUH4=; b=CrW3IpIajKgRQEMvttADHsbuYf IYqZVUp3dMWWjEX4JKC/cwLObEbiEn04mn0hSZim2rUvRm7H3qesaTONjMSlL6RV eMYZBJBTYl/dMcRXHCx7peco5lWBjVVuKelVsRD30Cm01Q+gpDtHWjmm3jIXMvoI y1UTEhKEtDuoBMHbgFUyk6Z66MRC1vHSnWN9nTyiMYZ04qe5lH2RdD5gt6ZgyG6f vBnNI9HknIC23OMOcU4pLpKLXjKyjvAcE3KT+Qjh4qmvZ273iWuhvFhGVdP9riZD sOodHH9oEzv2bqq9YC4W1xhunRTEhs251C4JEchozik8wOOkJU9aBMdCjmzQ== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; t= 1757958267; x=1758044667; bh=PzC16XBR5LoiNNSWwKbxGsInxWTBja2W9f+ WkiQqUH4=; b=NOdRlt58XRlXkqgPWkK+6YJiIpsr8WrMofimD2hiTFed4byOPiI V+7GjPzHputtQvPny5mCmqa1/E+CYInQEcsxRIOLCAmy6pqWt1flI0y3SaeqKXap tKl/G8dgxJpS0cSIKh8YH3jIkInMtwnTcYyeUZmbQCCBtQ5nLaLq2fxy9tR2eM4U yCEZYxaS+IDi9PLtWKMTeXuGCNiKYLXJtLEf3Oj6uPiBD7yzLHYYj3tvZ0jbmg13 F0YULeWkT0msmVfNgO8XSEiBOkzJHAA38fakyrmho1SE18X5OjLq8H8cmvBs9jx3 Oa/KL1KQBuEopH5mHFBAzV5PkpTNrLrisXw== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdeggdefkeefvdcutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjug hrpefhvfevufgjfhffkfgfgggtsehttdfotddtredtnecuhfhrohhmpefluhhnihhoucev ucfjrghmrghnohcuoehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtth gvrhhnpeeikeeufefhtedvffdtgeefkefhffeggfefiedvudegfffgffffveevvdeileff udenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehgih htshhtvghrsehpohgsohigrdgtohhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeeipdhmohguvgepshhm thhpohhuthdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtghhithhgrggughgvthesghhmrghilhdrtghomh dprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtsehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohep jhhlthhosghlvghrsehgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepphhhihhllhhiphdrfi hoohguuddvfeesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopehphhhilhhlihhprdifohho ugesughunhgvlhhmrdhorhhgrdhukhdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtshhtvghrsehpohgsoh igrdgtohhm X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 15 Sep 2025 13:44:26 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget" Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Justin Tobler , Phillip Wood , Phillip Wood Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] add -p: mark split hunks as undecided In-Reply-To: <3e2ec7b37f1935c5b091fc4b47b6209beb384d3a.1757950144.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> (Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget's message of "Mon, 15 Sep 2025 15:29:03 +0000") References: <3e2ec7b37f1935c5b091fc4b47b6209beb384d3a.1757950144.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2025 10:44:25 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain "Phillip Wood via GitGitGadget" writes: > From: Phillip Wood > > When a hunk is split, each of the new hunks inherits whether it is > selected or not from the original hunk. If a selected hunk is split > all of the new hunks are marked as "selected" and the user is only > prompted with the first of the split hunks. The user is not asked > whether or not they wish to select the rest of the new hunks. This > means that if they wish to deselect any of the new hunks apart from > the first one they have to navigate back to the hunk they want to > deselect before they can deselect it. This is unfortunate as the user > is presumably splitting the original hunk because they only want to > select some sub-set of it. > > Instead mark all the new hunks as "undecided" so that the user is > prompted whether they wish to select each one in turn. In the case > where the user only wants to change the selection of the first of > the split hunks they will now have to do more work re-selecting the > remaining split hunks. However, changing the selection of any of the > other newly created hunks is now much simpler as the user no-longer has > to navigate back to them in order to change their selected state. That is great, but ... > Due > to concerns that users may be relying on the current behaviour [1] > this change is guarded by WITH_BREAKING_CHANGES. ... this does not really sound like a good candidate for "before version X we used to do this, but after X we no longer do so". Unless it is a mere bugfix, in which case such a change does not deserve a huge-version-bump switchover like this. On the other hand, assuming it is not a bugfix but introducing a different behaviour, where both the original and the new ones are useful depending on the situation, wouldn't it be better to give users choices at runtime instead, with a configuration variable at least, but possibly with a interactive command to choose which behaviour is used on demand?