From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0F0B202A3 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2017 21:53:16 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753974AbdJPVxO (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Oct 2017 17:53:14 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([104.130.231.41]:54542 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752107AbdJPVxN (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Oct 2017 17:53:13 -0400 Received: (qmail 9905 invoked by uid 109); 16 Oct 2017 21:53:13 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Mon, 16 Oct 2017 21:53:13 +0000 Authentication-Results: cloud.peff.net; auth=none Received: (qmail 17069 invoked by uid 111); 16 Oct 2017 21:53:17 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.94) with SMTP; Mon, 16 Oct 2017 17:53:17 -0400 Authentication-Results: peff.net; auth=none Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 16 Oct 2017 17:53:11 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2017 17:53:11 -0400 From: Jeff King To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] color: downgrade "always" to "auto" only for on-disk configuration Message-ID: <20171016215311.m72jarmqhjagy6o6@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <20171012021007.7441-1-gitster@pobox.com> <20171012021007.7441-2-gitster@pobox.com> <20171012123153.i265nun6pklw7kjg@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20171013014721.d4vesqv4v5j7tmk2@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20171013130638.dgc6kawy5mvrbasz@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Sat, Oct 14, 2017 at 12:01:46PM +0900, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > That takes us back to the pre-regression state. The ancient bug from > > 4c7f1819 still exists, but that would be OK for v2.15. We'd probably > > want to bump the -rc cycle a bit to give more confidence that (2) caught > > everything. > > Yes, I think that is the approach I was pushing initially with the > jc/ref-filter-colors-fix topic that was later retracted; the result > of your 4-patch series more or less matches that one, modulo that I > didn't treat for-each-ref as a plumbing. Ah, right, I forgot about that one while I was putting it together. So many alternatives floating around. > I do share the worry that > it is hard to make sure that these post-revert adjustment caught > everything; after all, that was a major part of the reason why my > earlier attempt was retracted. I still think this is the _right_ > direction to go in, even though it is harder to get right. To be honest, I'm not actually very worried. I think missing a post-revert adjustment is the main risk, but my general sense is that there hasn't been a lot going on with color fixes outside of my recent work. Famous last words and all that, I'm sure. :) > True. Let's see what others think. I know Jonathan is running > the fork at $work with "downgrade always to auto" patches, and while > I think both approaches would probably work well in practice, I have > preference for this "harder but right" approach, so I'd want to see > different views discussed on the list before we decide. After pondering over it, I have a slight preference for that, too. But I'm also happy to hear more input. -Peff