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=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,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 F3E5DC4338F for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 22:09:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFF64600EF for ; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 22:09:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S232135AbhHCWJK (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Aug 2021 18:09:10 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com ([173.228.157.52]:59763 "EHLO pb-smtp20.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229663AbhHCWJJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 3 Aug 2021 18:09:09 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B97F0128B11; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 18:08:57 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=/epit/7mmfyojE5v2BNBSGyAHxGH9OzxbdRYMu Hv0Wo=; b=JXTmUoJ2sJ7uKW5S/6HqBkGICLBQv9Cocd9xoBytZExV/IGv70qT/2 OYHXgDwehdBnru/UJfXBIBAgRe12u6ALhzVrFadCnnhcHdZgshXDi+RCYDrdnM5T JIVgsN1G71jI9yitrsvZsNLzJiN+dxrkBf4jfWFS/mvAG1kI7O1u0= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B08D5128B10; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 18:08:57 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [35.196.71.182]) (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 00D26128B0B; Tue, 3 Aug 2021 18:08:54 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Jeff King Cc: Elijah Newren via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, Christian Couder , Derrick Stolee , Emily Shaffer , Eric Sunshine , Johannes Schindelin , Jonathan Nieder , Jonathan Tan , Phillip Wood , =?utf-8?Q?Ren=C3=A9?= Scharfe , Taylor Blau , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , Elijah Newren Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] [RFC] Switch default merge backend from recursive to ort References: Date: Tue, 03 Aug 2021 15:08:53 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Jeff King's message of "Tue, 3 Aug 2021 11:56:37 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.2 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 64A5BB24-F4A7-11EB-BFB1-D5C30F5B5667-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Jeff King writes: > It would make sense to me to do the switch in 'next' early in the > post-v2.33 cycle. It can cook there for a bit, but I think we have found > that it's much more likely to see actual use once it hits 'master'. So I > don't see a particular reason to have it sit in 'next' for a long time. > We should get as much exposure in 'master' during the v2.34 cycle as > possible. I do not mind queuing what is available today to 'next' to gain 2 more weeks of dogfood time during the pre-release freeze. If an simple escape hatch that lets us say "anytime we ask ort, use recursive instead as an emergency measure" can be added with a trivially obvious small patch, that would be a plus. > The nice thing is that the two strategies can co-exist. So if it does > turn out to have any regressions, it's an easy revert to switch back, > and even post-release users can switch at runtime. We have pull.twohead, > but I don't think we have an equivalent that would impact a bare "git > merge" or "git rebase -m". Maybe it would be worth adding those as an > escape hatch?