From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] Formatting variables in the documentation Date: Thu, 26 May 2016 12:23:48 -0400 Message-ID: <20160526162348.GA18210@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1463587109-22476-1-git-send-email-tom.russello@grenoble-inp.org> <20160518181500.GD5796@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20160526043607.GB6756@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Matthieu Moy , Samuel GROOT , Tom Russello , git@vger.kernel.org, erwan.mathoniere@ensimag.grenoble-inp.fr, jordan.de-gea@ensimag.grenoble-inp.fr, stefan@sevenbyte.org, jrnieder@gmail.com, rybak.a.v@gmail.com To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu May 26 18:24:02 2016 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 1b5y4i-0003XX-V4 for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 26 May 2016 18:23:57 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754522AbcEZQXx (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 May 2016 12:23:53 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:44646 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1753900AbcEZQXw (ORCPT ); Thu, 26 May 2016 12:23:52 -0400 Received: (qmail 4608 invoked by uid 102); 26 May 2016 16:23:51 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Thu, 26 May 2016 12:23:51 -0400 Received: (qmail 19901 invoked by uid 107); 26 May 2016 16:23:56 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Thu, 26 May 2016 12:23:56 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 26 May 2016 12:23:48 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, May 26, 2016 at 09:18:17AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > 1. Somebody produces a patch flipping the default. The patch is > > trivial, but the commit message should tell why, and try to dig up > > any possible problems we might see (e.g., why wasn't this the > > default? Particular versions of tools? Some platforms?) > [...] > There was no particular "caveat" raised there to recommend against > using this on particular versions of tools or platforms. It was > inertia that has kept the new optional feature "optional". Thanks for digging. That matches my recollection and the limited research I did more recently. > > 2. Assuming no problems, Junio merges the patch to "next". We get > > any reports of issues from people using "next" day-to-day. > > So I can do these steps myself up to this point. After waiting for > a few days to see if somebody else with better memory tells me what > I forgot, perhaps. OK. I was trying to see if (1) could be low-hanging fruit for any of the newcomers, but at this point it probably makes sense for you to just write the patch. -Peff