Re: [PATCH] git: --no-lazy-fetch option

From: Linus Arver <linusa@google.com>
Date: Mar 9, 2024, 01:57 UTC
Message-ID: <owlya5n8416t.fsf@fine.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <20240217052932.GC539459@coredump.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 13 quoted lines

> On Fri, Feb 16, 2024 at 09:22:20AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
> [...]
>> Add documentation and note that for this variable, unlike many
>> boolean-looking environment variables, only the presence matters,
>> not what value it is set to.
>
> Yuck. IMHO depending on GIT_NO_REPLACE_OBJECTS=0 is somewhat crazy, and
> we could consider the current behavior a bug. It's probably not _that_
> big a deal either way (because I would not expect anybody to set it that
> way in the first place). But I wonder if being consistent across
> variables trumps retaining weird historical compatibility for such a
> far-fetched case. I dunno. I guess this is https://xkcd.com/1172/. :)

I totally agree with your take on this. Would such cleanup patches (e.g., changing the behavior of GIT_NO_REPLACE_OBJECTS=0 to be "false" instead of "true") be acceptable as #leftoverbits?