Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contre...@gmail.com> writes:
> >> - With the endgame of "out of box Git without any configuration
> >> refuses 'git pull' (without --merge/--rebase) that does not
> >> fast forward" in mind, start warning "In the future you will
> >> have to either set pull.mode (and/or its friends) or type
> >> "pull --merge" (or "pull --rebase") when the endgame version
> >> of 'git pull' would fail with the error message, but still do
> >> as was asked to do as before. At this step, existing users
> >> can set pull.mode to "merge" or "rebase" or whatever to
> >> squelch the warning.
> >> - Flip the default. By the time this happens, thanks to the
> >> previous step to warn beforehand, nobody needs to see the
> >> warning. (your step 4)
> > This is what my last version of the series did. However, my plan was
> > to land this in 1.x so users could see the warning, and then flip the
> > switch on 2.0.
> > This plan, however, fell off the cliff.
> Yeah, I see that $gmane/234488 explains why the second step in the
> previous one stopped. I guess it was in expecting a reroll state,
> waiting for that other topic (I do not remember offhand) to
> I see nothing touching the affected codepaths now, so this time
> around we may have a better chance, perhaps?
A chance of what? Do you want me to reroll to include the future
backwards-incompatible change warning? Should I include the patch that
turns the switch?
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