From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Frans Klaver Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] completion: remove old code Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:19:21 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1327880479-25275-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <1327880479-25275-3-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <20120130023642.GA14986@burratino> <7vd3a1erwf.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , Jonathan Nieder , git@vger.kernel.org To: Felipe Contreras X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jan 30 12:19:35 2012 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 1RrpGh-00053C-HB for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 12:19:27 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752274Ab2A3LTX (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2012 06:19:23 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f174.google.com ([209.85.216.174]:33841 "EHLO mail-qy0-f174.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752135Ab2A3LTW (ORCPT ); Mon, 30 Jan 2012 06:19:22 -0500 Received: by qcsg15 with SMTP id g15so2137051qcs.19 for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 03:19:21 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=q4Nw90Y1F09gO5n9kdyk8e/jKY2MvOc1DW26wQDIG+M=; b=Nms6PlIj3Gol++acNXy7SMgf1/aY08xCDPyKteo9+OTkGNE5tw+Z90N6+gsLEbW0Ta 43qGgk9GbHqZ7nHqQFzkEabKBtUiycgdDk5CWBt93R7lZ7eJwT+DHraa8IerUbb+TMxe 9r7efQOMeY/6BuQFGCMA/KelpU1yD3K7FcLEw= Received: by 10.229.137.72 with SMTP id v8mr6225568qct.43.1327922361554; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 03:19:21 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.224.105.143 with HTTP; Mon, 30 Jan 2012 03:19:21 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 11:51 AM, Felipe Contreras wrote: > On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 6:27 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Felipe Contreras writes: >> >>> OK, maybe some people use it, but most likely they are using an old >>> version of git, and thus an old version of the completion script. >> >> Please adjust your attitude about backward compatibility to match the >> standard used for other parts of Git. > > What attitude? This attitude: > I am simply stating a fact. How much percentage of > people do you think still have .git/remotes around? How many people do > you think have clones more than 3 years old? And how many of these > people would complain if remotes were not properly completed for these > repos? > > I doubt anybody would have complained, but I guess we would never > know, because I already proposed a solution that would work for them > and only uses a *single* line of code, unlike the current 40 ones. > > I don't see what is the problem with the attitude of sending a patch > to remove code that most likely nobody cares about (neither you or I > have numbers on this), and then finding an alternative when people do > care about it. I don't think Junio actually meant an "attitude", but just your angle of approach (== attitude) on backwards compatibility. Maybe numbers for this could be generated from the next git user survey. If numbers justify this change, maybe this or something like it could be scheduled for a major release of git. Cheers, Frans