On Saturday, December 23, 2023 5:02 AM, Peff wrote: >On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 02:04:56PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> > Right, that is the "gotcha" I mentioned in my other email. Though >> > that is the way it has behaved historically, my argument is that >> > users are unreasonable to expect it to work: >> > >> > 1. It is not consistent with the rest of Git commands. >> > >> > 2. It is inconsistent with respect to existing options (and is an >> > accident waiting to happen when new options are added). >> > >> > So I'd consider it a bug-fix. >> >> So the counter-proposal here is just to drop KEEP_UNKNOWN_OPT and >> deliberately break them^W^W^Wrealign their expectations? > >Yes. :) But keep in mind we are un-breaking other people, like those who >typo: > > git sparse-checkout --sikp-checks I don't see why git sparse-checkout -- --sikp-checks would be the only way to get that typo into a garbage entry, to be consistent with other commands. Without the --, --sikp-checks should result in an error. >and don't see an error (instead, we make a garbage entry in the sparse checkout >file). > >> I do not have much stake in sparse-checkout, so I am fine with that >> direction. But I suspect other folks on the list would have users of >> their own who would rather loudly complain to them if we broke them >> ;-) > >Likewise, I have never used sparse-checkout myself, and I don't care _that_ much. >My interest is mostly in having various Git commands behave consistently. This >whole discussion started because the centralized --end-of-options fix interacted >badly with this unusual behavior. I use sparse-checkout every day and do depend on it working predictably (although I would take a fix to see it work as above, with the -- path separator), so personally, I care about this a whole lot -- in terms of consistency.
