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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 223B6E82CCC for ; Wed, 27 Sep 2023 19:57:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230000AbjI0T5h (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Sep 2023 15:57:37 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50400 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229995AbjI0T5X (ORCPT ); Wed, 27 Sep 2023 15:57:23 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (pb-smtp20.pobox.com [173.228.157.52]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 44CD41993 for ; Wed, 27 Sep 2023 12:56:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pb-smtp20.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 75E7A204DC; Wed, 27 Sep 2023 15:56:44 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=VCXGRgzQC0Rk7QxtvNHeGOPdNx/yhF4K+EbfWN 4vgps=; b=lZXZp4ay5Y5kz0UeYEhYlFAtjYT++Un9f92KEPjQyZbHVD6GuI6gqa 8O1wMtu3J6PalbKjTyIY0+gFtKXdWH+AGSS26AbSNcEdFTyt9sM57q6GUCDiwrnJ XnwveXDblQzodLtuEo9bK12w2lcEwN6d5iFbWB6+aJdrXT/FLIwjY= Received: from pb-smtp20.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp20.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6E352204DB; Wed, 27 Sep 2023 15:56:44 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.125.153.120]) (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 0F2A5204DA; Wed, 27 Sep 2023 15:56:41 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: "Eric W. Biederman" Cc: , "brian m. carlson" Subject: Re: [PATCH] setup: Only allow extenions.objectFormat to be specified once In-Reply-To: <87r0mjn4ly.fsf@gmail.froward.int.ebiederm.org> (Eric W. Biederman's message of "Wed, 27 Sep 2023 08:11:05 -0500") References: <87h6ngapqb.fsf@gmail.froward.int.ebiederm.org> <87r0mjn4ly.fsf@gmail.froward.int.ebiederm.org> Date: Wed, 27 Sep 2023 12:56:39 -0700 Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: F9EB8B18-5D6F-11EE-A516-F515D2CDFF5E-77302942!pb-smtp20.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org "Eric W. Biederman" writes: > For me the fundamental question is if we allow multiples compatibility > hashes or historical hashes how do we specify them? Have the option > appear more than once? A comma separated list? As you found out, we tend to use both, but the former does look more natural to me. The "usual" pros and cons [*] involve how easy it is to override the settings given by more general low-priority configuration files with more specific high-priority configuration files, and does not apply to the extensions.* stuff that are by definition repository specific. [Footnote] As I said, this does not apply to the topic of this discussion, but just for completeness: * comma separated list allows overriding everything that was said earlier wholesale; there is no ambiguity, which is a plus, but there is no incremental updates, which may be a minus when flexibility is desired. * multi-valued configuration variable allows incremental additions, but ad-hoc syntax needs to be invented if incremental subtractions or clearing the slate to start from scratch is needed.