Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:
> Hi Junio,
>
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2014, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@xxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > The 'invalid tag name' and 'missing tagger entry' warnings can now be
>> > upgraded to errors by setting receive.fsck.invalid-tag-name and
>> > receive.fsck.missing-tagger-entry to 'error'.
>>
>> Hmm, why can't all warnings promotable to errors, or are the above
>> two mentioned only as examples?
>
> Those were the only ones that were always shown as warnings but never
> treated as errors.
Sorry but I don't quite understand this comment; I suspect the root
cause might be that we have different mental models on these
tweakable error severities.
Because I come from the school "To these N kinds of events you can
independently assign different (i.e. info, warn, error) outcomes",
moving the FIRST_{INFO,WARNING,...} position in the array would only
affect what happens by default, never hindering the user's ability
to tweak (in other words, there is no linkage between "now you can
tweak" and the order of events in the list, the latter of which only
would affect what the default severity of each event is).
It appears that your design is from a different mental model and the
order and position in that list has more significance than what the
default severity of each event is but how much the severity can be
tweaked, or something, which I somehow find incomprehensible.
Puzzled...
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html