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=-0.8 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 631C4C433E0 for ; Thu, 28 May 2020 00:43:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0666C206DF for ; Thu, 28 May 2020 00:43:27 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="GdtEIQg5" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1725681AbgE1An0 (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2020 20:43:26 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:53661 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725267AbgE1AnY (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 May 2020 20:43:24 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B34E7CD692; Wed, 27 May 2020 20:43:22 -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=7nqvRBb+GqNN2zOGxmm54a7frAw=; b=GdtEIQ g5Fajx2LE5gRj3KaQFZxHgNKZFF9IUNp2ww6CiUFA8T0/e9eEgl2BR5BsyzW+4WE T+kB6yBjTEcLkSmtVTclQwfpH3A8efewSSNZahVoboiJFLbpGj+AQ6F0Ff5sn5Vb IEn0qxW/IC/3YdV3KjTbPnkExQPWaedTkpS5A= 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=weHaRy0KfW+ncrFsmjfLaWauqZno9bJz aEKPnh1MUyRHe/99Fp5hHdes9b4hNe0Rxd2OXJItcip1JXcXT02bXD12hwIGJxO3 t14/GjuhOzm8EEZC3AZGfuidwWUn3r6BEN89QoOj3UzGF5LJILqfJH/HP25hnymA iGp+ldb/xnk= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AC261CD691; Wed, 27 May 2020 20:43:22 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.196.173.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 02A8CCD690; Wed, 27 May 2020 20:43:19 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jonathan Nieder Cc: Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: jn/experimental-opts-into-proto-v2, was Re: What's cooking in git.git (May 2020, #09; Tue, 26) References: <20200527235808.GD56118@google.com> Date: Wed, 27 May 2020 17:43:18 -0700 In-Reply-To: <20200527235808.GD56118@google.com> (Jonathan Nieder's message of "Wed, 27 May 2020 16:58:08 -0700") 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: 3A275BD0-A07C-11EA-9AC8-8D86F504CC47-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jonathan Nieder writes: >> I have been wondering about the same thing, and if it were not using >> its own custom way to read the configuration, it would have been a >> non-brainer to merge it down before the release. > > Hm, do you have more detail about this? git_config_get_bool feels > very standard and non-custom. > > Do you mean that you would like it to go in repo-settings.c? No. I fully accept your reasoning in the proposed log message why a handcrafted query to the config system is done in the location the patch adds a call. There is nothing wrong with the patch. But that means that the way it uses the "experimental" variable is different from the battle-tested way it has been used, which makes it less than "non-brainer". It may not be risky after all, but still. This late in the cycle, the fewer things we need to worry about, the better. > >> But this late in >> the cycle, I'd rather not. > > Sure, I can understand. > > Would this be something to put on "master" soon after the release? That was exactly what I had in mind.