From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS3215 2.6.0.0/16 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from out1.vger.email (out1.vger.email [IPv6:2620:137:e000::1:20]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0491B1F506 for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 19:32:10 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: dcvr.yhbt.net; dkim=pass (1024-bit key; unprotected) header.d=pobox.com header.i=@pobox.com header.b="oxVNE9N2"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S231316AbiIVTbw (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:31:52 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:49284 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229864AbiIVTbu (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:31:50 -0400 Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (pb-smtp1.pobox.com [64.147.108.70]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA46D1075BB for ; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 12:31:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pb-smtp1.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 04E2014A5C3; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:31:49 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=U1P+lrI60j5skD4Xcr2hCcEk7cX0O4mjoDYhyg vsBgk=; b=oxVNE9N2yS/EKCPzvin/zN3RAYc2mlk2M84+fFuFOD7icqCa73zyha pUY58e68v7R4eAFuxdn171HMCDP47M1TZGaE/tZMM8piU4BI2c/q6KLctWd0sWX7 or5oDy1vVMDI0kz5G4RbddIgAZd0rq0Z8NjEwssr8R5dTn8dAYaww= Received: from pb-smtp1.nyi.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EFF2A14A5C2; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:31:48 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [34.83.5.33]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp1.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 53CF814A5C1; Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:31:47 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Derrick Stolee Cc: Derrick Stolee via GitGitGadget , git@vger.kernel.org, vdye@github.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] maintenance: make unregister idempotent References: Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2022 12:31:46 -0700 In-Reply-To: (Derrick Stolee's message of "Thu, 22 Sep 2022 08:37:47 -0400") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 32C13988-3AAD-11ED-978C-2AEEC5D8090B-77302942!pb-smtp1.pobox.com Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Derrick Stolee writes: >> I am not sure if this is a good idea. What is the ultimate reason >> why we want to allow running it blindly without knowing if it is >> necessary? Is it because there is no easy way to tell if unregister >> is needed in the first place? > > We want to leave the internal details of what it means to be > registered as hidden to the user. They could look for the repo in > the global config, but that seems like a hassle when they just > want to make sure they are not currently registered. OK, so there is no published officially sanctioned way to ask "is this repository under maintenance's control and cron jobs run in it?" or "give me the list of such repositories". Then I can see why you want to allow users to blindly run "unregister", with or without "--force". But doesn't it point at a more fundamental problem? Is there a reason why we want to hide the list of repositories (enlistments?) from the users?