From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: [PATCH 16/18] fsck: support demoting errors to warnings Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2014 21:12:06 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Dec 23 21:12:19 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Y3VoX-0003gK-Kt for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 23 Dec 2014 21:12:17 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754452AbaLWUMN (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Dec 2014 15:12:13 -0500 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]:50153 "EHLO mout.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751096AbaLWUMM (ORCPT ); Tue, 23 Dec 2014 15:12:12 -0500 Received: from s15462909.onlinehome-server.info ([87.106.4.80]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx001) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0M3RVA-1XlhsV1dLM-00qyyR; Tue, 23 Dec 2014 21:12:07 +0100 X-X-Sender: schindelin@s15462909.onlinehome-server.info In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20) X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:r2MB4+5VGikAdqyVqYGts9+YahDYBw2T/9rgLMvJNiAzNB9yB+B O6N7/t+vPA54azmEBbN+trpe4NPbVHKbjvlnXldDpDOLi1UuD6moQXeNBe6IckfLlkwu7M0 HjfXH4bis1VUsUXRffuYrSzsY6D1UNpLtWMI8UMlNqK3rQjwEZ3Xi9eSBSB3VLGgeJHjY1u /RiqkUKYaLFkhvXQm2Nzw== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi Junio, On Tue, 23 Dec 2014, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > > > On Tue, 23 Dec 2014, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > > >> Having said that, I think "missingTags" etc. should not be > >> configuration variable names (instead, they should be values). > >> > >> Because of that, I do not think we need consistency between the way > >> these "tokens that denote kinds of errors fsck denotes" are spelled > >> and the way "configuration variable names" are spelled. > > > > Okay. That makes more sense. > > I am sorry that I didn't step back and think about it earlier to notice > that we shouldn't be talking about configuration variable name syntax. > I could have saved us time going back and forth if I did so earlier. Do not worry. You were just trying to make this software better, same as I tried. Unfortunately, I will not be able to submit v2 of this patch series this year, but I will do so in the second week of January (including the change to the global array with the default severity levels because I do want to see this feature integrated). Ciao, Dscho