Hi, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote: > I'm just saying it's hard in this case to remove one piece without the > whole Jenga tower collapsing, and it's probably a good idea in some of > these cases to pester the user about what he wants, but probably not via > gc --auto emitting the same warning every time, e.g. in one of these > threads I suggested maybe "git status" should emit this. I have to say, I don't have a lot of sympathy for this. I've been running with the patches I sent before for a while now, and the behavior that they create is great. I think we can make further refinements on top. To put it another way, I haven't actually experienced any bad knock-on effects, and I think other feature requests can be addressed separately. I do have sympathy for some wishes for changes to "git gc --auto" behavior (I think it should be synchronous regardless of config and the asynchrony should move to being requested explicitly through a command line option by the callers within Git) but I don't understand why this holds up a change that IMHO is wholly positive for users. To put it another way, I am getting the feeling that the objections to that series were theoretical, while the practical benefits of the patch are pretty immediate and real. I'm happy to help anyone who wants to polish it but time has shown no one is working on that, so... Thanks, Jonathan
