Re: [Bug report] git diff stat shows unrelated diff

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Feb 15, 2019, 23:32 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqr2c84ohn.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <ad85402e-0ad2-4f4d-3b66-9250115072c0@iee.org>

Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org> writes:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On 15/02/2019 20:12, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>
>> Historically, it was a mistake to allow A..B to be used for two
>> endpoints, which was made back when we haven't thought things
>> through.  That is why I stopped "warn to deprecate and then
>> completely remove", as I do not think it would help people very much
>> if "git diff A B" can be spelled with two-dots.
>>
>> But in a distant future long after that happens, by the time nobody
>> remembers what A..B meant for "git diff", I do not think I'd
>> strongly be opposed to reusing it to mean something different.
>
> Would an option be to add a opt-in config to do the warning, rather
> than start immediately at a deprecation warning?

Well, anything would be "an option". I am not sure it would be particularly a good option to allow people to "opt" into getting warned, only to get a chance to train their fingers not to type double-dot instead of a SP, earlier than other people, though.

> It would give users the chance to test out their usage early should
> the so wish/desire/notice.

I am somewhat puzzled.  What are you trying to achieve by that?

Those who do *not* opt into that "early warning" configuration dance would eventually be warned whenever they type "diff A..B", and the timing for that eventuality is not under their control, so quite honestly, I do not see much point in "giving users the chance".