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. -- 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