On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 2:10 PM, Stefan Beller <sbel...@google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 1, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Jeff King <p...@peff.net> wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 01, 2016 at 01:56:34PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >>> > As of -rc0, we have both --indent-heuristic and --compaction-heuristic >>> > (along with matching config), and they are mutually exclusive. >>> > >>> > In [1], Stefan suggested just replacing the compaction heuristic >>> > entirely with the new one (and you seemed to agree). If we're going to >>> > do that, it makes sense to do so before the release, so that we don't >>> > get stuck supporting --indent-heuristic forever. >>> >>> You meant "compaction" in the last part? I think it is probably a >>> good idea. >> >> I thought the plan mentioned in the mail I linked was to keep the indent >> heuristic, but simply _call_ it the compaction heuristic. IOW, to swap >> out the implementation under the hood for something we know is better. > > AFAICT Michaels design is better in every aspect than what I did initially, > so it supersedes the work I did there. I would support the swap in names. >
Agreed, it's much better than the original idea, and results in better diffs in every single case we could find. >> >> We've already released a version with --compaction-heuristic, so we are >> stuck keeping it forever either way. > > IIRC the release notes specifically noted this flag to be experimental and > may be removed in future versions. I agree, I think that we specifically spelled out that this might go away, and so I don't think we're stuck supporting it forever. We don't even really need a deprecation time frame either. > > When not doing the swap of the implementation, but rather remove the > experimental feature of compaction-heuristic and introducing a *new* > experimental --indent-heuristic, this may drive the point across that > these names are actually experimental. I think we should swap names as "compaction heuristic" is more generic. Thanks, Jake
