From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ramkumar Ramachandra Subject: Re: Why does 'submodule add' stage the relevant portions? Date: Mon, 25 Mar 2013 23:57:34 +0530 Message-ID: References: <7v38vjz7sx.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20130325182023.GA1414@google.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , Git List , Jens Lehmann To: Jonathan Nieder X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Mar 25 19:28:28 2013 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 1UKC8B-0005V3-2u for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 19:28:27 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932871Ab3CYS15 (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Mar 2013 14:27:57 -0400 Received: from mail-ie0-f177.google.com ([209.85.223.177]:43795 "EHLO mail-ie0-f177.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932207Ab3CYS1z (ORCPT ); Mon, 25 Mar 2013 14:27:55 -0400 Received: by mail-ie0-f177.google.com with SMTP id tp5so3330631ieb.8 for ; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 11:27:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-type; bh=0Ew9b/Xmzkov/skQl4DKpalDpMz62nzZDiGmH7w8SlQ=; b=i/zBttp6bEmnfTN69hFCkHlLzKKe5OH6TSpJcL0dWprsLvrLBv75sv/s0ezF7IdZRK GiXCIHP4TZfGwA16YG56dJ+9Sdfqu0uINT2aqMM8PRUP8Rk348eaFiyRAsmlKhbOmuuI NMNcDPTOsz6UPLkFeIzPR2jk4x7gnlMAj2nHc/BRR9GxgA75CY2wY5gbwWj0H/rZJs2F 6GQljwpY2tYFrRIUnFTrzgQL78pnVYydOmzZlw9FpGwhbWNCs9H9yQWHIBl7bpGXXStY 1iRiaqSpxLX5vQa9b63XJ4T6OtlNnIBw+403aypCajUMhziIlRECLiYI30vNTbPSTfRG 4m2w== X-Received: by 10.50.50.71 with SMTP id a7mr12006878igo.14.1364236075201; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 11:27:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.166.33 with HTTP; Mon, 25 Mar 2013 11:27:34 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130325182023.GA1414@google.com> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jonathan Nieder wrote: > Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: >> Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> Ramkumar Ramachandra writes: > >>>> Git 2.0 is coming soon, so I'm excited about breaking a lot of >>>> backward compatibility ;) >>> >>> Don't. >> >> push.default is the necessary exception? > > A while ago there was a discussion of changes of the "If we were > starting over today, it would be obvious we should have made it work > the other way" kind and potential transition plans for them leading up > to 2.0. It's way too late to throw new breakage in. > > More generally, it doesn't make a lot of sense to save thinking about > such questions for the last minute before a new major release. If an > important change will require breaking compatibility and can only be > done using a painful 5-year transition, start today (and send patches > to the ML when an appropriate quiet moment comes to get review) so the > 5-year counter can start ticking. I agree that big important changes that break backward compatibility (like adding generation numbers to commit objects) will require this kind of time and effort to stabilize. Does a saner push.default value, or even tweaking the output of 'git status' to show what 'git status -sb' shows now (git status is porcelain, and no person in the right mind will write a script to parse it), require this? I'm talking about slightly better defaults at the porcelain level, at most.