Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > >> That's probably OK, though it is a little unlike other bools in that "0" >> is usually a strict synonym for "false". So we could go the other way, >> with "0, false, off, no" meaning "show but don't run" and leaving >> "never" by itself to mean "do nothing". > > That's my fault. Your version makes perfect sense. > > Thanks for being extra careful (well, more careful than myself, that > is). Now this left the patch in a stuck state, with the latest round v4 still having the "0 and false mean different things" caused by mistake. We should do the "0 and usual 'false' all show but don't run, say 'never' if you want it to be absolute no-op", which is more natural. If I find time, I can update further based on v4, but no promises. Thanks.
