public inbox for git@vger.kernel.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox•com>
To: Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks•im>
Cc: git@vger•kernel.org
Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jun 2024, #04; Wed, 12)
Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2024 08:22:47 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqq7cesoojc.fsf@gitster.g> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZmqJDVTAiBrYJGRW@tanuki> (Patrick Steinhardt's message of "Thu, 13 Jun 2024 07:52:13 +0200")

Patrick Steinhardt <ps@pks•im> writes:

> On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 05:30:04PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> * ps/document-breaking-changes (2024-06-04) 4 commits
>>  - BreakingChanges: document that we do not plan to deprecate git-checkout
>>  - BreakingChanges: document removal of grafting
>>  - BreakingChanges: document upcoming change from "sha1" to "sha256"
>>  - docs: introduce document to announce breaking changes
>> 
>>  The structure of the document that records longer-term project
>>  decisions to deprecate/remove/update various behaviour has been
>>  outlined.
>> 
>>  Getting there.
>>  source: <cover.1717504292.git.ps@pks•im>
>
> Just to make sure I understand the status: do you expect me to do
> anything in this context? The latest version did have some final
> discussion, but from my point of view there wasn't anything actionable.

Yeah, the only thing from the discussion that may be missing is this
one on [1/4]:

 - https://lore.kernel.org/git/ZmE8myG5c99UJeCA@tanuki/

But otherwise, the typofix for [3/4] in the thread has already been
amended in when the topic was queued, so we are almost there.

I do not know if we want to explain the version number scheme there
(in your first response [*], you said you didn't want to give the
impression that the jump from 1.5.x to 1.6.0 was a huge deal,
implying a move from 2.45.x to 2.46.0 can be equally huge, but in a
later response [*], you seem to have liked the explanation to clear
potential confusion.  If that is your final position, then [1/4]
needs updating (with a reroll or just saying "yeah, squash that
update in").  If that is not, we can go with what we have, but I
haven't heard an explicit "even though I said it is a good addition,
explanation of the historical version scheme is a bit out of place,
so let's scratch it", either.  I have no strong preference myself,
but merging it to 'next' will close the door for you to say "ah, I
forgot about 1/4" later, so that was primarily what I was waiting
for.

Thanks.


[References]

 * https://lore.kernel.org/git/Zl_4IIqFmoPhx1Gc@tanuki/
 * https://lore.kernel.org/git/ZmE8myG5c99UJeCA@tanuki/

next prev parent reply	other threads:[~2024-06-13 15:22 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-06-13  0:30 What's cooking in git.git (Jun 2024, #04; Wed, 12) Junio C Hamano
2024-06-13  5:52 ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-13 15:22   ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2024-06-14  5:52     ` Patrick Steinhardt
2024-06-13 13:35 ` Phillip Wood
2024-06-13 16:20   ` Junio C Hamano

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqq7cesoojc.fsf@gitster.g \
    --to=gitster@pobox$(echo .)com \
    --cc=git@vger$(echo .)kernel.org \
    --cc=ps@pks$(echo .)im \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox