Philip Oakley <philipoakley@xxxxxxx> writes: > On 15/02/2019 20:12, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >> Historically, it was a mistake to allow A..B to be used for two >> endpoints, which was made back when we haven't thought things >> through. That is why I stopped "warn to deprecate and then >> completely remove", as I do not think it would help people very much >> if "git diff A B" can be spelled with two-dots. >> >> But in a distant future long after that happens, by the time nobody >> remembers what A..B meant for "git diff", I do not think I'd >> strongly be opposed to reusing it to mean something different. > > Would an option be to add a opt-in config to do the warning, rather > than start immediately at a deprecation warning? Well, anything would be "an option". I am not sure it would be particularly a good option to allow people to "opt" into getting warned, only to get a chance to train their fingers not to type double-dot instead of a SP, earlier than other people, though. > It would give users the chance to test out their usage early should > the so wish/desire/notice. I am somewhat puzzled. What are you trying to achieve by that? Those who do *not* opt into that "early warning" configuration dance would eventually be warned whenever they type "diff A..B", and the timing for that eventuality is not under their control, so quite honestly, I do not see much point in "giving users the chance".
