On 04/28/2014 11:37 AM, David Kastrup wrote:
Johan Herland <jo...@herland.net> writes:

Obviously, the feature would necessarily have to be optional, simply
because Git would have to keep understanding the old commit object
format for a LONG time (probably indefinitely), and there's nothing
you can do to prevent others from creating old-style commit objects.

Johan: I seem to have missed your previous email (fat-fingered something
on my mail client I expect).

Your **reasons** for making it optional are all wrong.  People like me
(and David) who are opposed to this run the risk that if the **format**
were to officially change in some way or for some reason (like, say, if
SHA1 is no longer in favour, or whatever), then this "feature" is
foisted on us willy-nilly.

That's not good.

So, while I appreciate your point that it should be optional, please
let's accept that in the end it should be optional because **not
everyone likes it**!

Personally, I am _strongly_ opposed.  How I name and juggle my private
branches is nobody else's business in a distributed version control

They are private.  My personal workflow.  Not part of a commit.

Hear hear!!
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to