From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 19:28:21 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] Add core.mode configuration
Message-ID: <525ee8d5ba989_3983c19e7c8b@nysa.notmuch>
In-Reply-To: <20131016063436.GB24964@shrek.podlesie.net>

Krzysztof Mazur wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2013 at 11:03:26PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> > > not some "next" behavior that may change in future.
> > 
> > But I'm suggesting to add a core.addremove option as well, like you suggested,
> > am I not?
> 
> Yes, I think we both agreed on adding core.addremove. I'm just not
> convinced if we should also add core.mode.

If we add core.addremove, all the issues you mentioned are solved. If we do
that, now the question is, how exactly does core.mode = next affect anybody
genatively? If you don't like it, you don't set it, that's why it's a
configuration. I don't see the problem.

> > So you would be happy if we had core.addremove = true *and* core.mode = next,
> > right? You would use one, different people with different needs would use the
> > other.
> 
> Yes, if there are people that will use core.mode it will be worth
> adding. I'm just not one of them.

I am already using it.

-- 
Felipe Contreras