From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-b7-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-b7-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.158]) (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 8259218AFC for ; Fri, 2 May 2025 16:46:37 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.158 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746204399; cv=none; b=XO6RoLJvOWr2DyW8P8mkBX7mp1B6em7hM17rVf2x3OZDgcSOtxMesh0ckixAGPl8YJIF5FQz4aGGS0N/2xqeh1HjVQAz7EDL3C6d7sK4/4vQvobXViTL7XmJkuVthUTNOg4guqYMci7kDTamxKHBsz5CCoAwhKce4eqHBBE9nEs= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1746204399; c=relaxed/simple; bh=ES33826o+Ycqbfos0yInhZ6XX2E1A3cSwPF24qs9eXc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=ecs0/F0Cf/fh8bKOPkwY2203kNqqafdiOXsUbtJkGaYeFr3F8UMXM4TwCuo6AG7w/9VivXFniISJgTFcmL63RrU1BLrchU4C+KRxkN9uaiHXPyGzNppe18LN3i5Mj2jpIfTRhv4fZY5ds9i3PN7VgQw6fuLvyezVpG0ogbcZt5w= 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=XPlpFji2; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=uT2JHdls; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.158 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="XPlpFji2"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="uT2JHdls" Received: from phl-compute-06.internal (phl-compute-06.phl.internal [10.202.2.46]) by mailfhigh.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8ECD125400E6; Fri, 2 May 2025 12:46:36 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-02 ([10.202.2.161]) by phl-compute-06.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 02 May 2025 12:46:36 -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=fm2; t=1746204396; x=1746290796; bh=9tMLkbMGac lM+9LbnwRS9e3W4pbBCQToKQYuEiv3SZU=; b=XPlpFji2cOnbdat2uMOHDvaDKH BMyZjm0fqGVdZz8MeTT8OwMoG3F5F1qH8ls9RLdfPxfQ4PKkJoCzXZASd0+I+ASF TzDq/34ywuL6Qr86vPR4lSK4w1rPJvcTDOnWQzwU1o5rQiJDSGzBfk/NC1StbafO PSIKvmip2gTsDEpdDW0wCzsXOpxX8S0yK2pzbbx2FrWgOzvmUvDGAFfRjE0zh7+7 HxdOAUL+PHRBG5S+ysmBz7iy+JWgIylHyhs4dFLLUnWANl2+ve3jc0Xjh+EnOfpI Ef1+xDw7o9kq6EMd+Kc5kivmOodzzftVbPIQrCyZDfBI5itscSTx0rIobYAA== 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=fm3; t= 1746204396; x=1746290796; bh=9tMLkbMGaclM+9LbnwRS9e3W4pbBCQToKQY uEiv3SZU=; b=uT2JHdlsHbAN4xXS9XApEw/xoh96jAfZgi9VMKH5GDEHGXMAr20 0RUpq7TenrrpPs0swqlWeCmd5KttXfooPMZSDkPNOy7BSrR/kasBV7PlpDKMKu4c 3l7YdMl/q1JC+thIEwXvBFGK8vrSnHMcbAoHKlxh/Pm+KEyPRtvG/tASyMrMIyuv +rp7sqdce2NW4rXZOz+Q9jxcrrgHXeFg2QkGQJdthikdejpPUzKs+aQ8fAW0x/se 7/4N0xxMhiEronwLJm/ltYh3eeh0Dz8hGC454CwkDwmaAVTAW7SksF6i1Tcl3NQr iy+69zLejAEn1lm1aiT9qVv2ZBC2AuGfDJQ== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefvddrtddtgddvjedvleeiucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggv pdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpih gvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtofdttder tdenucfhrhhomheplfhunhhiohcuvecujfgrmhgrnhhouceoghhithhsthgvrhesphhosg hogidrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepieekueefhfetvdfftdegfeekhfffgefg feeivddugeffgfffffevvedvieelffdunecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrg hrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomhdpnhgspghr tghpthhtohepfedpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepphhssehpkhhsrd himhdprhgtphhtthhopehgihhtsehvghgvrhdrkhgvrhhnvghlrdhorhhgpdhrtghpthht ohepghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Fri, 2 May 2025 12:46:35 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Patrick Steinhardt Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/2] Nominating "whatchanged" for removal In-Reply-To: (Patrick Steinhardt's message of "Fri, 2 May 2025 11:08:10 +0200") References: <20250501213452.370729-1-gitster@pobox.com> <20250501225958.2947677-1-gitster@pobox.com> Date: Fri, 02 May 2025 09:46:34 -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 Patrick Steinhardt writes: > On Thu, May 01, 2025 at 03:59:56PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> This does not go far enough to touch the "Git 3.0 removal" list in >> Documentation/BreakingChanges.adoc, but is a preparatory step >> necessary if we ever wanted to do so in the future. > > I'm a little confused. These patches very much feel like starting the > deprecation process for git-whatchanged(1), so why wouldn't we at the > same time list it as an upcoming breaking change? Ah, yes, I was overly eager in the documentation change. To make an analogy of what happened to pack-redundant, this corresponds to c3b58472 (pack-redundant: gauge the usage before proposing its removal, 2020-08-25) plus 4406522b (pack-redundant: escalate deprecation warning to an error, 2023-03-23) rolled into one. We are gauging the impact of the removal by inconveniencing existing users a big way, with a tiny escape hatch to make them feel the pain, so that we can hear their scream better. We are not there yet to announce the decision to deprecate, like fcf31daa (pack-redundant: document deprecation, 2023-03-28) did, to those who do not even use the command. I think it may make sense to hold that WARNING part of the change, leaving it to a future step that touches the BreakingChanges document. > Or is the intent > rather to figure out whether anybody is still using this command so that > we can then deprecate it after a couple releases if we haven't heard > back from anybody? Yes, exactly. Thanks.