From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.6 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C9DEC1F428 for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2023 13:56:18 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=gmail.com header.i=@gmail.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=l+gKbWmD; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231313AbjCIN4P (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Mar 2023 08:56:15 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:43778 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S231236AbjCINzJ (ORCPT ); Thu, 9 Mar 2023 08:55:09 -0500 Received: from mail-lf1-x12e.google.com (mail-lf1-x12e.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::12e]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7137E10A8B for ; Thu, 9 Mar 2023 05:54:44 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-lf1-x12e.google.com with SMTP id i28so2431294lfv.0 for ; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 05:54:44 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; t=1678370082; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=DCk0HvoOqpTCFsNm1mqRZrl+mAcgye+V8EF86Fjbr60=; b=l+gKbWmDN3iNX5IbDMSv5JtBBCmuErVcSumFbEOEQiFsAuQ0wZSioAOXthLLoII3nA I98f9qz14KfLRJ0JsrUH0s36b7URD+2ikhIp9yNcfaA6ofQyt4DGvtuifn4GbHQn0Cm+ hPJZLEhMXRPzB7BeempQpk2J3BxD4Iv6AdNaQ9+H7mZtNKPbCjr9I+G4jgLczx4l5jMQ b0O4IHBCb1lb12990vco4PRVPjpBx+dCAgHUxJBTNEINhErRSXWGPs6lYvsyX4eAmfR6 S7nLWLAzN6gQnyubegeYra4K7m2vEFslBdLEdcla38A3/vslR8zzfKFMvde0deSsuLXb 5naA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1678370082; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:in-reply-to:date:references :subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=DCk0HvoOqpTCFsNm1mqRZrl+mAcgye+V8EF86Fjbr60=; b=QZKNnKnAAkTpp6j2zIeAVnESs94Ds3Q+XHfirmABGvwjXRQaDZrYM3JTB/ng9v8cyI QdEAkNHjG56UZtBKS+iKmwojAtt0In2xnXPBLy8Kpu2pgJ2X1W1W252wpjcj/yj64zRI ckgf0DcbcPIfeAYfc//jeWiCMh3Y0lzWdUdjVcMYsNhZysnjZrdloT96x+quAaWVh5KN lu6dv2GnIOrWTC4mSBPA9E1YN0UUBN9zyBSvW1JwPnBcZdhKMJxzS7mggQw2ZcsnhcaV 2ku251OszOZLWJ7MTR0MEK1t9bJ7xkT30PiLlF6XeDDc3wF8rNjZ8EzBRYOeN1jRg9UF 5E2A== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKU1BhqFYX4ab7xjroEOw0uIyRwN9aKFB+5GjK8eD9qccOvdOw6G euKNyPisxOHXShmxi/PQkqCaAUeMwuY= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set8NH/Y4uXExqgoLOcYXKWmGxcMSzxLasO0MuFy5tRTWNqmbDRMXECe3SJIwRxfZRByFJ/10MA== X-Received: by 2002:ac2:5307:0:b0:4e7:fa9a:4d41 with SMTP id c7-20020ac25307000000b004e7fa9a4d41mr4835453lfh.14.1678370082228; Thu, 09 Mar 2023 05:54:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from osv.localdomain ([89.175.180.246]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r6-20020ac25a46000000b004cc9042c9cfsm2648065lfn.158.2023.03.09.05.54.41 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 09 Mar 2023 05:54:41 -0800 (PST) From: Sergey Organov To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Glen Choo , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: so/diff-merges-more (was Re: What's cooking in git.git (Feb 2023, #01; Thu, 2)) References: <871qn5pyez.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <87wn4tej2f.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <87wn3zqefx.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <878rg8j2vg.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> <87jzzqzy20.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> Date: Thu, 09 Mar 2023 16:54:40 +0300 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Wed, 08 Mar 2023 15:08:55 -0800") Message-ID: <874jquxc67.fsf@osv.gnss.ru> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > Sergey Organov writes: > >> My point is that the story with -c, or --cc is roughly the same, and >> that you yourself fixed --cc once upon a time to imply -p, so it's >> especially confusing for me that you are now in opposition to similar >> change to "-m". > > I think we all saw a good explanation for that already in the > thread. > > The mistake by "--cc" was fixed relatively quickly, but it is now > way too late to change the behaviour of "-m" without hurting > existing users. I think I've wasted enough time on this in this > thread already, so let's stop comparing --cc and -m now. That's fine with me. I already agreed long ago that to be on the safe side we shouldn't simply change -m nowadays, and addressed that concern by putting -m behavior change under configuration option in the current series. So what's the reason of rejection? Thanks, -- Sergey