From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-11.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,T_DKIMWL_WL_MED,USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80A991F597 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 20:38:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1730919AbeGRVRq (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 17:17:46 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f196.google.com ([209.85.161.196]:45469 "EHLO mail-yw0-f196.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1730220AbeGRVRp (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Jul 2018 17:17:45 -0400 Received: by mail-yw0-f196.google.com with SMTP id 139-v6so2229963ywg.12 for ; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:38:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=C5+VUsDZwsDVoTJm1KOgzYGLN4DSWR7WJMjFw/fqRJs=; b=uXVfUt9clojbEajIXxg9H/bqtzcfWo8LzEUcNcXxPadYS6XRh9Jjjg1T5GaMXU7Fj3 SO5yE2icgkH0KoyDh6pbE9T855nrp0xvutEgzF90nakCIq4ykulzsRFzxtU3oWJ0925r ocXKCgCxjtWn0MoZOF+a2PguqARWM2gZxO+1amNhlNOnehr5sQEi72LLKuv+J29N8akf GPZohAvZJjPGbkbuhA9nAfcPdkJdHGRto1ZBwqCNosN+Kphk9Yz0UUHk/xjsj2p+E1gv AiLGZC3m/Af5OeVNlg2Vgi4ngIwMVvermug8kCFOQyElHSpYM5dCv7sLiu23UxLaUWWh 5ZLQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=C5+VUsDZwsDVoTJm1KOgzYGLN4DSWR7WJMjFw/fqRJs=; b=ZgjCCcj5SkpF2kpgePFBrQFC0y2emHVC0c/2PvZqvnfswt3ozYVyewjh7sPtYkU5yK oYB5bCBj9oL7e1tcxVxng6zVL4F3Wc5SNCsFtuMeCtTXD94NhcWFYP7tTW5V2tg96IXU pwBDu1F2Es5jaoUxZCckfHuT21eM/FLeKQF05zcDW4DQVPD9DF4AlsrKCIwiYmE49wxE uxfpC0wWZ2i99TMRe2KtMGJ35EepFN4x85+078xDU+qWVEUqEUa7cQGdbZbktSwmc0s2 /ZACCtLwTV4jzexqzHvmdLNJIPLxv5eBQn6dKMrqNhO25jq+Jk1GpZEAmk60fTRvg6zu FVXg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlEFgqbKkFEE6Ox63zZTbY17fa1c4V68Z/cvroMGsjiDHV6DnNTK OwUW7FiFYKT0dtWHjr9zpq/b1/5N1DwbFj4J5v35Ng== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpcPdZAUr9bMT+HN5ZotfIYIwHNPi5bdxECaSSZ3WGcp47/U5SmqPes5KGCZFDG+kkKDKdaQgDYQky2LxKbfpWQ= X-Received: by 2002:a81:a9c4:: with SMTP id g187-v6mr3835913ywh.238.1531946289748; Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:38:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180718201702.GA15306@sigill.intra.peff.net> <20180718203152.GA26110@sigill.intra.peff.net> In-Reply-To: <20180718203152.GA26110@sigill.intra.peff.net> From: Stefan Beller Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2018 13:37:58 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] add core.usereplacerefs config option To: Jeff King Cc: Derrick Stolee , git , Derrick Stolee Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 1:31 PM Jeff King wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 04:23:20PM -0400, Derrick Stolee wrote: > > > This patch looks good to me. The only thing I saw was when I ran 'git grep > > check_replace_refs' and saw the following in environment.c: > > > > int check_replace_refs = 1; /* NEEDSWORK: rename to read_replace_refs */ > > > > This does help me feel confident that the case where the config value is > > missing will default to 'yes, please check replace refs', but also the > > NEEDSWORK could be something to either (1) do, or (2) remove the comment. > > Neither needs to happen as part of this patch. > > Yeah, it was actually that comment that led me to Stefan's recent > c3c36d7de2 (replace-object: check_replace_refs is safe in multi repo > environment, 2018-04-11). > > And ironically, back when I originally wrote this patch, it _was_ called > read_replace_refs. That changed in afc711b8e1 (rename read_replace_refs > to check_replace_refs, 2014-02-18), which was in turn picking up a > leftover from e1111cef23 (inline lookup_replace_object() calls, > 2011-05-15). > > Since Stefan's patch logically undoes e1111cef23, I think that's why he > put in the comment to move back to the old name. I think so, too > Personally, I do not find one name any more informative than the other, > and would be happy to leave it as-is (dropping the comment). > > But I'm also fine with following through on the "do". According to > c3c36d7de2, that was waiting for a calmer time in the code base. I guess > the best way to find out is to write the patch and see how terribly it > conflicts with pu. :) As someone burned by coming up with renaming (or rather lack thereof), I'd happily watch from the sideline this time. I think this patch is good; ship it. :-) Thanks, Stefan