Elijah Newren <newren@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> so it may be quite simple to deprecate "merge -s recursive". > > Yes...but why deprecate? I thought the plan was to (eventually) make > requests for either `recursive` or `ort` be handled by running the > `ort` backend. Making that kind of switch is much smaller than the > one we already made to switch the default backend from `recursive` to > `ort`, so I'm not sure I see what we gain by doing such a switch in > stages. Maybe I'm missing something? Didn't we "deprecate" but still indefinitely support "annotate"? I have been assuming that recursive will be in that category after ort establishes itself.
