From: Junio C Hamano Date: Wed, 27 May 2015 19:10:37 GMT Subject: Re: [RFC/WIP PATCH 05/11] transport: add infrastructure to support a protocol version number Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20150527063925.GC885@peff.net> Jeff King writes: > On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 03:01:09PM -0700, Stefan Beller wrote: > >> + OPT_STRING('y', "transport-version", &transport_version, >> + N_("transport-version"), >> + N_("specify transport version to be used")), > > Interesting choice for the short option ("-v" would be nice, but > obviously it is taken). Do we want to delay on claiming the > short-and-sweet 'y' until we are sure this is something people will use > a lot? In an ideal world, it is not (i.e., auto-upgrade and other tricks > become good enough that nobody bothers to specify it manually). Yes, just stuff 0 (not NULL but NUL) there; unless we have a very good reason to believe that the option will be used every day to toggle per invocation settings, we shouldn't squat on a short and sweet single letter.