Re: [RFC - draft] List of proposed future changes that are backward incompatible

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, 16 Feb 2009, Johannes Schindelin wrote:

On Sun, 15 Feb 2009, david@xxxxxxx wrote:

please be careful with the term 'deprecated', just becouse you would do
something a different way doesn't make it 'deprecated', that term should
only be used for features that are on their way out of the product, but
haven't been removed yet.

It is not deprecated because I do not like it.  Actually, I am pretty
indifferent about the pushing into a non-bare repository.

It is deprecated because a lot of people active in the Git community spend
a real lot of time explaining to a whole bunch of new users on IRC and
recently even on this list why their pushing into a non-bare repository
does not work, and why their suggestions how to solve the issue does not
work either.

if it is the correct thing to do with some workloads, it's not being deprecated. if it was deprecated then it is a capability that would be scheduled for complete removal, and nobody should ever use. not just the case where it needs to be used carefully, and you are putting in a warning about it.

David Lang
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux