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 BF8AD1F62B for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 19:24:54 +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=EO2DjTP6; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229613AbjBXTYw (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Feb 2023 14:24:52 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:52640 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229477AbjBXTYo (ORCPT ); Fri, 24 Feb 2023 14:24:44 -0500 Received: from mail-oi1-x22f.google.com (mail-oi1-x22f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::22f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BB08D18177 for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 11:24:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-oi1-x22f.google.com with SMTP id o12so113709oik.6 for ; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 11:24:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=0YcFikVsDNw4YOL6gNX6U40KTB1IiNPI+rBGRjNCtPc=; b=EO2DjTP6UsGgI4IueonbUl6cgvt3lbdS5jo+sgzeitzD0/T3mM/NBJBOCrzUaKFNZp /PaJA0JKGdvzCYKu9VuMa+eExvZLxxFt/F7Vub8wHy2kLGXyl8y5duiXv0JlhwIJdTW2 UN838cgqf20lWP207Is1BEm4xxRQPfusb0MReUjGF6Sqe6sT0Zynrk27Y8lQspTG7Qer y+A1r3HG3CnQai+U9/RjsKjQ2s8vLQlBIdnXJkhZYTO9TcDg9V83cMg/hPTl0cb+sJE6 9igukNL50QicrN+VTmCicbqYUdyZH2xi0YaGF0BQpHnvtD1vQskhx6ElUl8LnxHG9Zhp C7Kg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=0YcFikVsDNw4YOL6gNX6U40KTB1IiNPI+rBGRjNCtPc=; b=4N82I/0cLl1QA8Nqi8lyS5p+4nAGQQUoQWHo0VLOIOWr6lcCbsDGyPcigqs5Xu2vmh gLRDca/nmP/+RWoinyie0UuG7Xx9VeZc9eG+mmrvsvwVM58ZvGw8Y/oVidgkmQLjXlGP wWmzeEnKqvS5M8EoJASO/IqcoOOftiCLqRUHXW7UoPUnUj8rfwWm68a7klaA2wDFM3ln a+Nl2/61LohmNKk8hTmpQKzCk9/U4SwLLfT1t3/8M/r1PIjtWoB+WyYvIGX6RYC0z+IS 9ZAvC3fmNsZpzzSsO5hvoIL/rngMWtQw+RRHnTIc2nuoaM1mUSV0HlT/ZCF6NggpqiqU l6IQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AO0yUKUrbY1LzvgaITlNrrJwYlRiUlqyw8jTP8Oh0qzcHGi+i1p7fwwT SFBlZpBa87BHCELvFNAa1j3FgyFmhrFkAIIYuqs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AK7set+EMUglLzh/1OzWs9TQ3pcyRILJ1kT5rZXlKM571qKk7q1vIER339yGwklioBN8wYHMaOMXInF0RZI2IUGnXEY= X-Received: by 2002:a54:4105:0:b0:378:80e1:cdf2 with SMTP id l5-20020a544105000000b0037880e1cdf2mr1493715oic.5.1677266683023; Fri, 24 Feb 2023 11:24:43 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20230223053410.644503-1-alexhenrie24@gmail.com> <20230223053410.644503-2-alexhenrie24@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: From: Alex Henrie Date: Fri, 24 Feb 2023 12:24:26 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 2/3] rebase: stop accepting --rebase-merges="" To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Johannes Schindelin , git@vger.kernel.org, tao@klerks.biz, newren@gmail.com, phillip.wood123@gmail.com, sorganov@gmail.com Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Feb 24, 2023 at 12:13 PM Junio C Hamano wrote: > > Alex Henrie writes: > > > Phillip is concerned about people and scripts assuming that > > --rebase-merges is equivalent to --rebase-merges=no-rebase-cousins, > > see [1]. > > Isn't that already broken when you introduce rebase.merges > configuration? People and scripts are already relying on the lack > of rebase-merges to flatten, and script writers will be surprised to > receive a "bug report" complaining that their script does not work > when the users set rebase.merges to anything but no. Yeah, I don't know why breaking the assumption that --rebase-merges is equivalent to --rebase-merges=no-rebase-cousins is any worse than breaking the assumption that not passing --rebase-merges is equivalent to passing --no-rebase-merges. And the assumption is broken whether one new config option is introduced or two, so splitting the option up probably wouldn't make Phillip any happier. > > Tao and others are probably not going to like it if --rebase-merges > > without an argument undoes a rebase.merges=rebase-cousins > > configuration. > > That is why I suggested to keep --rebase-merges= (with no value or > an empty string) only for those who came from the world where it > defaults to no-rebase-cousins and there was no rebase.merges > configuration. If --rebase-merges= is given from the command line > without value *and* rebase.merges configuration is there (which is > Tao's concern?), the command line option can error out asking for an > explicit value to countermand whatever value is configured. > > Wouldn't that work for folks from both camps? Maybe. I still don't like the idea of --rebase-merges="" ever being not equivalent to rebase.merges="". -Alex