From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, FSL_HELO_FAKE,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EAD401F87F for ; Wed, 21 Nov 2018 01:03:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726016AbeKULfP (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Nov 2018 06:35:15 -0500 Received: from mail-pl1-f196.google.com ([209.85.214.196]:37623 "EHLO mail-pl1-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725939AbeKULfP (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Nov 2018 06:35:15 -0500 Received: by mail-pl1-f196.google.com with SMTP id b5so2863828plr.4 for ; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 17:03:13 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=DNkTMxIFb/oraD3WXd7+cRmAmxo7mVgIFa3M3FER5hQ=; b=E8OfiQEjUszslGpDARURfi2NLX4TYBVr7wzA9vqUOJ3ohtncGhe/vS808DXDWSiSP9 /9Vodqgk2MAnmKcm6f3z7ZYLx2ENnezO/147ei18Z18Bd5tk7BjFR8MSP2/GOI1gTtRW 8nwqDdxrHrY/32D2wj49FL1mMSSVn1qO20Ojek+luXzj2CVXX2EOS5UBsAsT3eQKJQi+ jj+hwbxp0kF8eYEhI0syydMcqJvWogxfaADMPEJkFZbauSUeeU0gZpc9GQHkuspj5lhO k3ivm1unEMEIcAz71o+9GDj0RWVjXdJwwyzEdRlU/NteclygGQmZJPFLkkmFkLd73ktA BAdg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=DNkTMxIFb/oraD3WXd7+cRmAmxo7mVgIFa3M3FER5hQ=; b=d0tOzcnEb1DoYOZOlx4FCrfyUrfVVWdPxVM/OaFvuJYKShwSxYn8JM9lR+WvJCCWZM Acqy43iTese6NCJ1wYkKTyiG00nH+vry/Hjseut9twDnjYBC++e7z6kLLR6oU801C8qi UiQcZhGHlXbWBQsg60RbjhjRrfjpWxKQFmAiBoPdsZwgVgCeRgMw7IA1KjdwBV/pMrma upVQwG+xz1uxcK7s4VZYDK9EvizTFSg/lswEHaeoG/u6xUbaKWVbo6JhMaS9XTOV6xtL UfWNq8jA6ou9t9dvZkBC6Gw4sbBlmHfRJaI9vIaybXSUHczeNEW3BcqpvihozySRA8A8 Mx0w== X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWaSp7TZMtOqS3/2YTqeHdsQN93IT0U7ROP7U0WlR+dMsvoTTWc5 vP2AYtur+tA1yo3YF8fBf6A= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/WF+lBx+++y6XjEpNG6hCaHyMm1LQ8vVBMZg9/d4wtuZoJ93hmgHgTfNRBwrQo6vI//YzWC2g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:902:4281:: with SMTP id h1-v6mr4614150pld.114.1542762192264; Tue, 20 Nov 2018 17:03:12 -0800 (PST) Received: from google.com ([2620:0:100e:913:3fb0:1473:cdbf:42]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id j197sm62927568pgc.76.2018.11.20.17.03.11 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 20 Nov 2018 17:03:11 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2018 17:03:09 -0800 From: Jonathan Nieder To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Ben Peart , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , git@vger.kernel.org, pclouds@gmail.com, Ben Peart , jonathantanmy@google.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/5] index: offer advice for unknown index extensions Message-ID: <20181121010309.GE149929@google.com> References: <20181010155938.20996-1-peartben@gmail.com> <20181113003817.GA170017@google.com> <20181113003938.GC170017@google.com> <20181120060920.GA144753@google.com> <20181120061544.GF144753@google.com> <87sgzwyu94.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano wrote: > This series has a strong smell of pushing back by the > toolsmiths who refuse to promptly upgrade to help their users, and > that is why I do not feel entirely happy with this series. Last reply, I promise. :) This sentence might have the key to the misunderstanding. Let me say a little more about where this showed up in the internal deployment here, to clarify things a little. At Google we deploy snapshots of the "next" branch approximately weekly so that we can find problems early before they affect a published release. We rely on the ability to roll back quickly when a problem is discovered, and we might care more about compatibility than some others because of that. A popular tool within Google has a bundled copy of Git (also a snapshot of the "next" branch, but from a few weeks prior) and when we deployed Git with the EOIE and IEOT extensions, users of that tool very quickly reported the mysterious message. That said, the maintainers of that tool did not complain at all, so hopefully I can allay your worries about toolsmiths pushing back. Once the problem reached my attention (a few days later than I would have liked it to), the Git team at Google knew that we could not roll back and were certainly alarmed about what that means about our ability to cope with other problems should we need to. But we were able to quickly update that popular tool --- no issue. Instead, we ran into a number of other users running into the same problem, when sharing repositories between machines using sshfs, etc. That, plus the aforementioned inability to roll back Git if we need to, meant that this was a serious issue so we quickly addressed it in the internal installation. In general, we haven't had much trouble getting people to use Git 2.19.1 or newer. So the problem here does not have to do with users being slow to upgrade. Instead, it's simply that upgrading Git should not cause the older, widely deployed version of Git to complain about the repositories it acts on. That's a recipe for difficult debugging situations, it can lead to people upgrading less quickly and reporting bugs later, and all in all it's a bad situation to be in. I've used tools like Subversion that would upgrade repositories so they are unusable by the previous version and experienced all of these problems. So I consider it important *to Git upstream* to handle this well in the Git 2.20 release. We can flip the default soon after, even as soon as 2.21. Moreover, I am not the only one who ran into this --- e.g. from [1], 2018-10-19: 17:10 jrnieder: Yes, I noticed that annoyance myself. ;) 17:11 Yeah, I saw that message a few times and was slightly annoyed as well. Now, a meta point. Throughout this discussion, I have been hoping for some acknowledgement of the problem --- e.g. an "I am sympathetic to what you are trying to do, but ". I wasn't able to find that, and that is part of what contributed to the feeling of not being heard. Thanks for your patient explanations, and hope that helps, Jonathan [1] https://colabti.org/irclogger/irclogger_log/git-devel?date=2018-10-19#l114