Re: [PATCH] diff: prefer indent heuristic over compaction heuristic

> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 01:12:12PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Jacob Keller <jacob.keller@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>> > I don't think we have too many config options that interact in this
>> > way, so I understand that "last writing of a particular configuration"
>> > makes sense, but interactions between configs is something that would
>> > have never occurred to me. I'll send a patch to drop the compaction
>> > heuristic since I think we're all 100% in agreement that it is
>> > superseded by the new configuration (as no case has been shown where
>> > the new one is worse than compaction, and most show it to be better).
>>
>> If I recall correctly, we agreed that we'll drop the implementation
>> of compaction, but use the name --compaction-heuristics to trigger
>> the new and improved "indent heuristics":
>>
>>     <20161101205916.d74n6lhgp2hexpzr@sigill.intra.peff.net>
>
> FWIW, I was swayed in the other direction by later messages in the
> thread. Especially your noting that the "compaction" name has always
> been labeled experimental, and Michael's argument in:
>
>   http://public-inbox.org/git/8dbbd28b-af60-5e66-ae27-d7cddca233dc@alum.mit.edu/
>
> I.e., we could keep calling it "--indent-heuristic", and probably drop
> the other heuristic entirely as a failed experiment.
>
> I can live with it either way, but since I am being quoted as the source
> of the suggestion, I feel like that's an invitation to add my 2 cents. :)
>
> Liberal quoting below since I am adding Michael to the cc list.
>
> -Peff
>