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: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 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 shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 720091F97E for ; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 12:49:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726384AbeKZXnn (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2018 18:43:43 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com ([173.228.157.53]:51907 "EHLO pb-smtp21.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726203AbeKZXnn (ORCPT ); Mon, 26 Nov 2018 18:43:43 -0500 Received: from pb-smtp21.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5818A36959; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 07:49:40 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=UZbAPInQ63uAmemz8zGSplvGjuE=; b=q+mULc POUpfcJtkPVAjoy8BF8QdNd+47CKo/pVCPbat+8KcH2ReD3YZnlMwhOecQUtDIr4 BNkmud36NEOeszbQ+LEnoUupM2hhSl1SU8l9exHte83R81ZwjhGruBvozZWsKBmH j5wiRUpEOx6sqrpIbR8MHxlUfaAv1CHFWCC6c= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=H1d0hc79pd76vXAAoANo+ZerusTH31rw ckvp/xcR04yLyY8kjuaLpISXZPIW/SYClMxP+Fwk44cmB2Np5JZZR6ShZtE5AfVW hgdrPMQzoRjzT0Gl5SplpavohbKSWdRdmpiOUPfzw/QsnhAcoHMNrkEeZ3zSodlt 27QxVaE8UG0= Received: from pb-smtp21.sea.icgroup.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47A0C36957; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 07:49:40 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [104.155.68.112]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pb-smtp21.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 58AC336950; Mon, 26 Nov 2018 07:49:37 -0500 (EST) (envelope-from junio@pobox.com) From: Junio C Hamano To: Per Lundberg Cc: "brian m. carlson" , "git\@vger.kernel.org" , Steffen Jost , Joshua Jensen , Matthieu Moy , Clemens Buchacher , Holger Hellmuth , Kevin Ballard , =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason , =?utf-8?B?Tmd1eeG7hW4gVGjDoWkgTmfhu41j?= Duy Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] Introduce "precious" file concept References: <20181111095254.30473-1-pclouds@gmail.com> <875zxa6xzp.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <871s7r4wuv.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <20181112232209.GK890086@genre.crustytoothpaste.net> <280aa9c3-0b67-c992-1a79-fc87bbc74906@hibox.tv> Date: Mon, 26 Nov 2018 21:49:35 +0900 In-Reply-To: <280aa9c3-0b67-c992-1a79-fc87bbc74906@hibox.tv> (Per Lundberg's message of "Mon, 26 Nov 2018 09:30:13 +0000") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Pobox-Relay-ID: BB7F925A-F179-11E8-88B4-CC883AD79A78-77302942!pb-smtp21.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Per Lundberg writes: > How about something like this: > ... > Would this be a reasonable compromise for everybody? I do not think you'd need to introduce such a deliberately breaking change at all. Just introduce a new "precious" class, perhaps mark them with the atttribute mechanism, and that would be the endgame. Early adopters would start marking ignored but not expendable paths with the "precious" attribute and they won't be clobbered. As the mechanism becomes widely known and mature, more and more people use it. And even after that happens, early adopters do not have to change any attribute setting, and late adopters would have plenty of examples to imitate. Those who do not need any "precious" class do not have to do anything and you won't break any existing automation that way.