Re: [PATCH v3] Add core.mode configuration

> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 01:51:41PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> > 
> > I don't see what is the problem. We haven't had the need for push.default =
> > simplewarning, have we? If you want the warning, you don't change anything, if
> 
> simplewarning makes no sense, because push.default=simple sets exact
> behavior,

> > you want to specify something, you already know what you are doing.
> > 
> > > 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?
> > 
> > Maybe, but would you actually use that option?
> 
> No.

> > > 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.
> > 
> > Maybe, but I don't think many users would use either mode, and that's good.
> > 
> > > 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.
> > 
> > OK, but that seems to mean you don't need core.mode = next-warn either. I'm not
> > against adding such a mode, but I would like to hear about _somebody_ that
> > would like to actually use it. I don't like to program for ghosts.
> >
> 
> As I said earlier, I don't think that next-warn it's worth adding, but
> such option might increase the number of people interested in the
> core.mode.