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=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,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 AD8591F428 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 21:16:41 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.i=@ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=20210112 header.b=NPh9Q53K; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230382AbjCWVQk (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2023 17:16:40 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46764 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229948AbjCWVQj (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Mar 2023 17:16:39 -0400 Received: from mail-yw1-x112f.google.com (mail-yw1-x112f.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::112f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3370225B81 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 14:16:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-yw1-x112f.google.com with SMTP id 00721157ae682-53d277c1834so417484827b3.10 for ; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 14:16:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20210112.gappssmtp.com; s=20210112; t=1679606197; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=YfGnvoxny/4BBNNn3QsAlV0Ns0ERpdJIYjxi0xjUWac=; b=NPh9Q53KHF1ueC1LVfwoPKmap+krR+DNshjYMqkWILZueS4e9UbjPUDRf5xrMNVYum 0e8SN50LePCemoT1RtX2v3VQ6mhq3FZ5RSecgcEgREFhiRXiFrwObKTcNSuHsLgrwlST vNPJD8chnU3qftslj4jfxZLpzcNhYnmXw9QqMSdu4SNoIHHLWiAkSv2WVz4B47cwdi6J OowSwHA7x5pTGLRI1cAblb7k433XeEMOjfE4wEtV12Thfy5F1a5em0RLyRpu2bx4W22B djXFonGAksRUkaSVdWAN5cmm8/G1mC6N3AriIERClvabNeaT4lpfrb1iCcSwawfQK1k9 uAOw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; t=1679606197; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=YfGnvoxny/4BBNNn3QsAlV0Ns0ERpdJIYjxi0xjUWac=; b=fSd2BP1Chlt3mW72Vc2JMj2qyuVDJ0/0q7YWH3iLDYpnW5d5JwbYFxFrJdHnI+hn4W EaAgxtGBH/zVXo4+gKq+Xf0K7cfMZf52skmbQoo53ZYR5ne9Ocu+z65xmZdvwYrja0oo B3PeXla1et84qtHvkSnhDOw7WW/W4wPOkq8jZsy2ptR7pG+SyQvDgyhqDXjTp3GBj3cY TB0P+TPqGyppNFeyZL3Vi22elwpH+7JGElwidWii0Bo719sV+drkg1xRXYCcbryVu8YA N86QQvfAwgapT+wK5/AUwsZtwRvKRrh2ZE5PjT5jFBmqrksuoz1MWN6JrcbVaVyWmkgg VfCQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AAQBX9fZZdk34SaWJUuF8a4C7efYP2936XFY2AlASY9eDV6JEX6DXi2u zHueDg9SvHXr4Ka7M/q3ZnwtTw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AKy350bq6QeU/MpKwAq+VCEAFRGMw4STA3kkAXUqiHjMlj5rSQYP0jFUwzhSTMzn9vdrJJ2tkMEuVg== X-Received: by 2002:a0d:ca93:0:b0:541:876d:ae50 with SMTP id m141-20020a0dca93000000b00541876dae50mr5015236ywd.44.1679606197282; Thu, 23 Mar 2023 14:16:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (104-178-186-189.lightspeed.milwwi.sbcglobal.net. [104.178.186.189]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x136-20020a81a08e000000b00545a08184e1sm48156ywg.113.2023.03.23.14.16.36 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 23 Mar 2023 14:16:36 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2023 17:16:31 -0400 From: Taylor Blau To: Junio C Hamano Cc: Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] pack-redundant: escalate deprecation warning to an error Message-ID: References: <20230323204047.GA9290@coredump.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Mar 23, 2023 at 01:56:26PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King writes: > > > I was looking in this file recently, and was reminded of the deprecation > > plan. The two data points above do give me a little bit of pause, but it > > seems like the current state is the worst of both worlds: we do not have > > the benefit of dropping the code, and people who try to use the command > > have a bad experience. So we should probably either proceed (as with > > this patch), or decide we need to keep pack-redundant. > > Sounds like a good thing to do. Will queue. Thanks. Yeah, I agree with and am persuaded by the "worst of both worlds" argument. I think that changing this to a die() is sensible for now. At what point would it be fair to drop this builtin entirely from the tree? Thanks, Taylor