Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jonathan Nieder <jrnie...@gmail.com> writes:
>> I don't mind seeing support for "-q" dropped, but I really don't think >> it's worth delaying git 2.0 for that. Would s/in Git 2.0/in some >> future release/ be ok? > > I do not think keeping the support for "-q" in is any huge burden. > We do not have to remove it, forever, for that matter. I agree with the above, which is why I don't want a promise to remove the "-q" option to cause Git 2.0 to be delayed. It would be better to schedule it for Git 3.0, or for another unspecified future git release. I thought the 2.0 boundary was a time for changes that everyone already knew we should make, where we had been waiting for a good moment to change behavior while giving people adequate warning to avoid disrupting them too much. We have a good collection of those for 2.0, and the next batch can wait until 3.0. Sorry for the lack of clarity, Jonathan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
