From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2021 10:58:00 GMT
Subject: Re: Train station analogy, was Re: [PATCH v3 00/15] [RFC] Upstreaming the Scalar command
Message-ID: <nycvar.QRO.7.76.6.2110071256110.395@tvgsbejvaqbjf.bet>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqr1cxrjdl.fsf@gitster.g>

Hi Junio,

On Wed, 6 Oct 2021, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
>
> > I don't think that there is a lot of sense in that. The main benefits of
> > `scalar` are in the `register` and the `clone` part, and the most natural
> > end game would hence be for `git init` and `git clone` to sprout new
> > options to support Scalar's features, in a Git-native way.
>
> Yes, that is even better.  An endgame where everybody benefits
> natively would be highly desirable.

I am glad that this question is now resolved.

> Now you are back, do you think we can have the "no more preserve
> merges backend" topic graduate to 'master', or do you prefer to cook
> it over the cycle (or even two)?

I did not see _any_ problems with it, so I'd be in favor of promoting it
to `master`. But if you want to play the game more carefully, I would be
fine with that, too.

Ciao,
Dscho