Subject: Re: RFC: Supporting .git/hooks/$NAME.d/* && /etc/git/hooks/$NAME.d/*

From: Marc Branchaud <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Apr 2016 09:40:05 -0400

On 2016-04-26 06:58 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> 
> Makes sense to have an experimental.* config tree for git for stuff like this.

I disagree.

* If the point is to express some kind of warning to users, I think the
community has been much better served by leaving experimental settings
undocumented (or documented only in unmerged topic branches).  It feels like
an experimental.* tree is a doorway to putting experimental features in
official releases, which seems odd considering that (IMHO) git has so far
done very well with the carefully-planned-out integration of all sorts of
features.

* Part of the experiment is coming up with appropriate configuration knobs,
including where those knobs should live.  Often such considerations lead to a
better implementation for the feature.  Dumping things into an experimental.*
tree would merely postpone that part of the feature's design.

* Such a tree creates a flag day when the experimental feature eventually
becomes a "real" feature. That'll annoy any early adopters. Sure, they
*should* be prepared to deal with config tree bike-shedding, but still that
extra churn seems unnecessary.

		M.