From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBECCC63777 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:57:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6404B247BA for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 15:57:20 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="SNuDSYM2" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727762AbgKRP46 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:56:58 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com ([64.147.108.70]:56826 "EHLO pb-smtp1.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726272AbgKRP46 (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:56:58 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ADC6E9EC88; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:56:55 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=sasl; bh=Pq0s8KC5DMh5 wCFpXQHyvVp2Rc8=; b=SNuDSYM2ODnUeoVlCPBfI5yU8OtCoDdrNFgvluhGZUcX TMfXX0e38sLCaf0PDRcrkzD6n/fPkJBPKI2b3jkjDpD5A4St2f3jzpS1J7ii9Qz6 51v+WFydJKVMKRXySuVw9M9btmr2kFaOsMIGJfEXB4JWSlfyMB1zFoQEsFDOpzA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; q=dns; s=sasl; b=IJKU1U ZsjOW9mS6KoVDR/Al/NmSHjSwpQNPj2ZKLRvUpRX1SzlvSlORnexluj2sGEqeFYM yFw8mZbcRXiGC5/a8KYhBZeeQATg9huuMfVbgfAogNiZ+PvkzAhr45dzQ1vBJuMV sq1vuf7EzjNMualzFMHUtMzHRzOHYvPas2weo= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B94D9EC87; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:56:55 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.74.119.39]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E317D9EC86; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:56:54 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: Johannes Schindelin , Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org, Theodore Ts'o , Don Goodman-Wilson , "brian m. carlson" , Felipe Contreras Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] tests: support testing with an arbitrary default branch (sort of) References: <20201113161320.16458-1-avarab@gmail.com> <20201113191418.GA764688@coredump.intra.peff.net> <87h7psg6lz.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <87ima2rdsm.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:56:54 -0800 In-Reply-To: <87ima2rdsm.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> (=?utf-8?B?IsOGdmFyIEFy?= =?utf-8?B?bmZqw7Zyw7A=?= Bjarmason"'s message of "Wed, 18 Nov 2020 14:32:25 +0100") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Pobox-Relay-ID: AE45F526-29B6-11EB-9A8F-D152C8D8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason writes: > ... In my mind that doesn't even require a > consideration of the political motivations at this point as far as > git.git is concerned, just: > > 1. Major Git hosting providers already made the change > > 2. Realistically a lot/majority of git's user base interact with that > in a major way. > > 3. A discrepancy in any default between /usr/bin/git and those > providers is more confusing than not. > > 4. #3 doesn't mean they say "jump" we say "how high" whatever the > change is. > > But in this case the default is an entirely arbitrary default. Not > e.g. that they decided to add some ill-thought out header to the > object format or whatever. Yes. > P.S.: Shouldn't the pull patch in d18c950a69f be using the advice > facility, not warning()? I think warning() is the right thing here, as it is self squelching. Setting pull.rebase (even to 'false') is sufficient---there is no need to set advise.setpullrebase to 'false' on top.