Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] log: create tighter default decoration filter

From: Derrick Stolee <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2022 09:41:15 -0400

On 7/26/22 2:19 PM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
> 
> On Tue, Jul 26 2022, Derrick Stolee wrote:
> 
>> On 7/26/2022 10:44 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:

>>> But I think this change is going about it the wrong way, let's have a
>>> list of refs that Git knows about as magical, instead of assuming that
>>> we can ignore everything that's not on a small list of things we're
>>> including.
>>>
>>> Wouldn't that give you what you want, and not exclude these sorts of
>>> custom refs unexpectedly for users?
>>
>> Instead of keeping track of an ever-growing list of exclusions, instead
>> making a clear list of "this is what most users will want for their
>> decorations" is a better approach.
>>
>> Users who know how to create custom refs outside of this space have the
>> capability to figure out how to show their special refs. My general ideas
>> for designing these kinds of features is to have a default that is focused
>> on the typical user while giving config options for experts to tweak those
>> defaults.
>>
>> You're right that this series perhaps leaves something to be desired in
>> that second part, since there isn't an easy _config-based_ way to enable
>> all decorations (or a small additional subset).
> 
> Yes, but this is just side-stepping the issue. Your X-Y problem is that
> you want to exclude certain refs that we're specifically creating.
> 
> I think that's fair enough, but I don't see why we're not specifically
> excluding just those then.

I'm advocating that we make a one-time change to have a set of "known
useful refs" as showing up in the decorations. Perhaps some users (like
yourself) need to react to that change, but it happens _once_.

Changing the rules repeatedly as new "hidden" namespaces are added is
more likely to cause confusion multiple times.

Thanks,
-Stolee