On Thu, Aug 15, 2019 at 04:40:50PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Emily Shaffer <emilyshaf...@google.com> writes: > > > I think a whitelist of config options to print would grow stale > > immediately, and the options we're missing would be very likely to be > > configs to turn on new experimental features - which is probably what we > > most want the bugreport for. > > The implementation of your "git bugreport" command comes from the > same version of Git as such an experimental feature you want > feedback to is shipped with, so I am not sure where your concern > about staleness comes from. > > If you really care about getting quality reports, you need to earn > users' trust (one way of doing so would be to maintain a good "list > of benign configuration knobs whose values help diagnosing issues"), > and you need to make sure we obtain relevant pieces of information. > Both of these things are something you need to actively work on. > > We have trained ourselves to the point that we consider it a bug if > you add a new command git-bugreport without adding a corresponding > pattern in the .gitignore file. And thanks to that discipline, we > have been fairly good at keeping .gitignore up to date. I do not > see a reason why we cannot do something similar to the registry of > configuration variables that we care about, which may be shipped as > part of "git bugreport" command.
I think comparing this habit to the .gitignore isn't quite fair - .gitignore tells me I forgot to add my new command binary to it, when I run `git status` to see what I need to add to my commit with new command. But, I agree that it's not going to be possible to create a completely leakproof blacklisting heuristic here. So I'll use a whitelist for the next patchset. - Emily