From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from fhigh-b2-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-b2-smtp.messagingengine.com [202.12.124.153]) (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 23D9C1E2602 for ; Mon, 12 May 2025 17:44:13 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.153 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747071858; cv=none; b=gWIBrHOP5XASMx9zIKqhdbKs6ypP3ANICmZ6qooOI2A9jW9qITxjyAnZMOJBHEynZpei8zUX0GrmeiS9HBeWkjq8Q1D4oB//F6I9gEcIOiZyD525AFcVaCVj+xdjpPbgOeTa/HZGdm3jvjjUqVA5Cd7Ni8twgEkZv6/3nrg5CB0= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1747071858; c=relaxed/simple; bh=HqE8sE5gk7X6tbkZkcCuUzyLHelnvhucsqyTt0Fqy70=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:Message-ID: MIME-Version:Content-Type; b=GaYmhQadWjPRWJfF7kf5he4lYfTG170xae9DLLmPRs4mFp3oUlpOlMBuxsnoQaJ8QwlO7oR3kDcN8WfceWLtMBZ86qkiVreCp1zSnp/Wx94L6IsVRvrOMrRQGqX5MWC4z3IHgL4lfGbIZ1Jzxr7CoE1umWYnzWuo0KpZZ7SoNTI= 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=GaWhKnuD; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b=QsO7uWDc; arc=none smtp.client-ip=202.12.124.153 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="GaWhKnuD"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.b="QsO7uWDc" Received: from phl-compute-03.internal (phl-compute-03.phl.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailfhigh.stl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 193F6254015A; Mon, 12 May 2025 13:44:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from phl-frontend-01 ([10.202.2.160]) by phl-compute-03.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 12 May 2025 13:44:13 -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=1747071852; x=1747158252; bh=BL/8BZaBTK xX484G4pnI3RfK6ILVd33c55jwHuuPXI0=; b=GaWhKnuDw5nygVlpWUH7PaTOpr j79otg9VS6ifD/8X0JDDUCHySZ8ODY74869I9HpjUsHLYLHtfd9Kmrf7gisfBTCR r5P2nuw0rdxAY4r3razpclYntC89jVbSdOtOEUNIVnwsV6MmWtvA0I1uEku6IMqB D7WrIxPbWjhQHNiG6wUB9gpO3YEDV1LN296LIBTibnbAvm5OJ28AhGrWjDnhjJ4C GoDlCaPt50zYf0ziUb50Y44ti3kPDJE0n6MjPVg8gVKnqsF4Hu93uB5V1DtCO+E3 4+hjjnfWqw/et3rKh/+mGkYcFGwPXDHvQ0+dgVIdMpY1+4HGXD/6DZfW8uMQ== 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= 1747071852; x=1747158252; bh=BL/8BZaBTKxX484G4pnI3RfK6ILVd33c55j wHuuPXI0=; b=QsO7uWDcyYvkyZ7uEvyOIfoQrf5FNRuXoQ1XZJtdNlCkClhj1+7 AU6730nrhcH0JoMo+l+P6JCwLDk8HuFkeLrjup19DwZwfHxKlaDvU1aFexf7TzXL oWBvbhgqf7cxmw6vj4/LnUFYkNFUKNCGIWhKHidiwerDKgByHDm1ZTst730Sb8Ut Qr8tZCsERKtb8svcDiiZwupxU6VVGqae7CjYQ6zvQjXHhHoY71+BvD81CPq0RYU1 BOsrZOmlWK/hDDvnp8F7/Su85qCd8pJ+XPmRWkU7wIVGUIyag+EyfPRtCOiadIZb P3IklfhU2FnLhLG/QtnB3qFTx9BO7gKFpPg== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefvddrtddtgdeftddukeelucetufdoteggodetrf dotffvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggv pdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpih gvnhhtshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtredttder tdenucfhrhhomheplfhunhhiohcuvecujfgrmhgrnhhouceoghhithhsthgvrhesphhosg hogidrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepfeevteetjeehueegffelvdetieevffeu feejleeuffetiefggfeftdfhfeeigeeinecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrg hrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtghomhdpnhgspghr tghpthhtohepiedpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepshhtohhlvggvse hgmhgrihhlrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithhgihhtghgrughgvghtsehgmhgrihhl rdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithesvhhgvghrrdhkvghrnhgvlhdrohhrghdprhgtph htthhopehjohhhrghnnhgvshdrshgthhhinhguvghlihhnsehgmhigrdguvgdprhgtphht thhopehpshesphhkshdrihhmpdhrtghpthhtohepghhithhsthgvrhesphhosghogidrtg homh X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: if26b431b:Fastmail Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 12 May 2025 13:44:12 -0400 (EDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: Derrick Stolee Cc: Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, johannes.schindelin@gmx.de, Patrick Steinhardt Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 4/4] scalar reconfigure: add --maintenance= option In-Reply-To: <35ecaa1d-589f-4d28-9d97-78bae8de2d41@gmail.com> (Derrick Stolee's message of "Mon, 12 May 2025 10:34:22 -0400") References: <684f04aaf7e87f22ab0b00a4fd42d2943304ef04.1746582637.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com> <35ecaa1d-589f-4d28-9d97-78bae8de2d41@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 12 May 2025 10:44:10 -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 Derrick Stolee writes: > My intention was to bend over backwards to prevent a behavior change > in the default case. However, I'm coming around to understand that > we don't need this background maintenance to be redone every time > and can become a no-op by default. (Other new configuration will > still happen.) > > In the case where we're fine changing the default behavior, then > the standard --[no-]maintenance option will work, though it is a > three-way switch where the lack of its existence means "don't do > either mode". Ahh, OK. I misread your intention. If it is common for existing users to disable maintenance, perhaps by mistake, together with configuration changes that are not quite right, perhaps also by mistake, and if they used reconfigure to recover from such mistakes, it indeed may make sense to nuke the current setting and enable maintenance unconditionally. As you suggested in a part of your response I omitted, we can annotate to give hints on the valid choices to help users, without changing the default behaviour. I am personally fine either way, as long as we clearly document the reasoning behind our design. Thanks.