From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Recommend these .gitconfig settings for git integrity. Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 09:55:04 -0800 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <56B0ED78.5030209@cs.ucla.edu> References: <87a8nlfqj9.fsf@red-bean.com> <83h9ht1o8q.fsf@gnu.org> <87mvrle8ho.fsf@red-bean.com> <56AE8126.9090708@cs.ucla.edu> <87wpqo77yc.fsf@red-bean.com> <87bn80ifmh.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87k2mo75bx.fsf@red-bean.com> <56AFB869.1080206@cs.ucla.edu> <83si1cyy3e.fsf@gnu.org> <56B06282.2050701@cs.ucla.edu> <87twlrgljm.fsf@wanadoo.es> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1454435756 9881 80.91.229.3 (2 Feb 2016 17:55:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 2 Feb 2016 17:55:56 +0000 (UTC) To: =?UTF-8?Q?=c3=93scar_Fuentes?= , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 02 18:55:45 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aQfB2-0007bb-Rr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2016 18:55:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58710 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQfB2-0003M6-64 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2016 12:55:44 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56390) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQfAS-0002I9-6a for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2016 12:55:12 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQfAQ-0004er-Vj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2016 12:55:08 -0500 Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:48714) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aQfAQ-0004eh-PP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 02 Feb 2016 12:55:06 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 50AF21601F0; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 09:55:06 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id wxBgpkpGXcCL; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 09:55:05 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2FBBF160522; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 09:55:05 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 93-wGHb2A_DG; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 09:55:05 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from penguin.cs.ucla.edu (Penguin.CS.UCLA.EDU [131.179.64.200]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 194BC1601F0; Tue, 2 Feb 2016 09:55:05 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 In-Reply-To: <87twlrgljm.fsf@wanadoo.es> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 131.179.128.68 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:199180 Archived-At: On 02/02/2016 07:49 AM, =C3=93scar Fuentes wrote: > I mean, it look like it does a good thing, if you read the > description. So why it is not activated by default? Maybe it has some > drawbacks. Yes, it has a drawback. I mentioned it in my previous message. On some=20 larger projects, it slows down some git operations. However, this does=20 not seem to be a significant problem with Emacs development. In contrast, omitting the option can cause significant problems later,=20 problems that can be hard to discover and even harder to repair. For an=20 example of this, please see the following bugreport on GitHub: https://github.com/wp-cli/php-cli-tools/issues/70 Apparently the wp-cli project has a corrupted Git history that could=20 have been prevented by the new setting. It is so much trouble to fix=20 this that the project's maintainer and the GitHub staff think that=20 fixing it is more trouble than it's worth, and will just live with the=20 corrupted repository. I'd hate to see the same thing happen to the Emacs=20 source code repository. > Anyone cared about that possibility, apart from the "I > activated it and so far, so good" testimony from*one* individual? I've been using it. So has Stefan, and Karl. Nobody who has used it has=20 reported problems. If there were real problems with this option we=20 should not make it the default. I will look into modifying autogen.sh to make this flag optional, since=20 there seems to be significant opposition to it. I still don't understand=20 why there's so much opposition, though. If the Emacs repository becomes=20 corrupted because this option was omitted, quite possibly we won't=20 notice, and even if we notice quite possibly we won't fix it. I would=20 hate to see that happen.