Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> * Peff: I have a proposal for Git 3.0, maybe this has been discussed?
> Can we get rid of some of the older protocols (dumb HTTP)?
Please discuss these on list. Removal of http walker (both for
fetching and pushing) you have my blessing ;-)
> * Patrick: Lots of esoteric things, like show-branch, which apparently
> nobody uses.
You remove show-branch and you will stop seeing "What's cooking"
("git show-branch master $branch1 $branch2 ..." is used as a way to
find the commits on each topic branch in flight, instead of running
"git log master..$branch" N times).
> * Elijah: not just removals, but changing defaults, etc.
Yes.
> * Emily: are we interested in non-backwards compatible changes, like
> adding multi-Author fields to commits?
> * Peff: I think that's a bad example, it can be done without breaking
> compatibility, but it was decided to not to do it. You're welcome to
> resurrect the discussion.
Good.
> * Taylor: the items on that document aren't a checkbox list of things
> to do before Git 3.0, but isn't a "let's get all of these things
> done and then we'll release Git 3.0".
Yes.
> * More that we'll all wake up one day, realize that we've done all
> or enough of what would go into Git 3.0, then remove a bunch of
> code, and ship it.
Not exactly (see my recent comment on feature.git3 on the list---we
need a good transition plan and early adopter opt-in mechanism).
