Re: [kernel.org users] [RFD] On deprecating "git-foo" for builtins

On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 01:10:14PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

I think it is fair to say that I have vetoed and am still vetoing many "UI
clean-ups" that propose to change things in a way that "should have been
this way for consistency's sake from day one, if there were no existing
user base".  During discussions to shoot down such proposals, I take
opinions from early adopters (that's you, kernel, wine and x.org people)
very seriously, perhaps to the point that outsiders would feel I am giving
them disproportionately large vetoing power.  Sadly, those "opinions from
eraly adopters" are less and less "real" but more "I'd imagine the early
adopters would say..." these days.  The process would work better if early
adopters do their part to help me by speaking up when it matters from time
to time.

I think just freezing the UI is not a good answer. Git's UI evolved too
wildly and uncontrollably in the early days and I think in the long run,
tweaking out at least some of the inconsistencies is good idea, IMHO.
Not that I would think there should be any more *major* changes
upcoming, I mean mostly small stuff (all that I hate the
git-checkout/git-reset dichotomy or git-add/git-rm asymetry, touching
this would be just too radical change by now, IMHO).

The only problem I can see with the transition were the deprecation
messages, as was mentioned much earlier in the thread. If it's going
away in few years, Git should start to nag about it now. Then, all whom
it concerns _will_ realize this and slowly transition at their own pace.
Also, maybe we should require all internal references and documentation
updated when *declaring the feature deprecated* (not when removing it),
even if it means delaying the phase-out; that was the other major
complaint in this thread that is worth remembering, I believe.

-- 
				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
The next generation of interesting software will be done
on the Macintosh, not the IBM PC.  -- Bill Gates