Re: [PATCH v3] Add core.mode configuration
- From
- Krzysztof Mazur <krzysiek@podlesie.net>
- Date
- Oct 15, 2013, 14:51 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20131015145139.GA3977@shrek.podlesie.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <525d4354a5436_5844e73e843d@nysa.notmuch>
On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 08:29:56AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
Show 17 quoted lines
> Krzysztof Mazur wrote: > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 07:32:39AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > > Krzysztof Mazur wrote: > > > > > > > > But with core.mode = next after upgrade you may experience incompatible > > > > change without any warning. > > > > > > Yes, and that is actually what the user wants. I mean, why would the user set > > > core.mode=next, if the user doesn't want to experencie incompatible changes? A > > > user that sets this mode is expecting incompatible changes, and will be willing > > > to test them, and report back if there's any problem with them. > > > > With your patch, because it's the only way to have 'git add' v2.0. > > Yeah, but that's not what I'm suggesting. I suggested to have *both* a > fined-tunned way to have this behavior, say core.addremove = true, and a way to > enable *all* v2.0 behaviors (core.mode = next).
I'm just not sure if a lot of users would use core.mode=next, because of possible different behavior without any warning. Maybe we should also add core.mode=next-warn that changes defaults like next but keeps warnings enabled until the user accepts that change by setting appropriate config option? That's safer than next (at least for interactive use) and maybe more users would use that, but I don't think that's worth adding.
For me, old behavior by default and warnings with information how to enable new incompatible features, is sufficient. So I don't need core.mode option, but as long it will be useful for other users I have nothing against it.
Krzysiek