From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761486AbZBMW0T (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:26:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753442AbZBMW0K (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:26:10 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:35088 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753406AbZBMW0K (ORCPT ); Fri, 13 Feb 2009 17:26:10 -0500 From: Junio C Hamano To: lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen) Cc: Ingo Oeser , Peter Zijlstra , L-K , Linus Torvalds Subject: Re: git-send-email References: <1234451714.10603.22.camel@laptop> <20090212192104.GD15809@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> <1234477025.10603.38.camel@laptop> <200902131034.05814.ioe-lkml@rameria.de> <20090213163923.GE15809@csclub.uwaterloo.ca> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2009 14:25:58 -0800 Message-ID: <7vtz6y6kjt.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 4E84F40A-FA1D-11DD-A5C7-6F7C8D1D4FD0-77302942!a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org lsorense@csclub.uwaterloo.ca (Lennart Sorensen) writes: > Split: 25 patch sets. > Shallow: 56 patch sets. > Deep: 6 patch sets. This is an interesting datapoint. FWIW, for the git mailing list, the stats are like Shallow=30 vs Deep=50 for a series longer than 3 patches (I stopped counting after looking at 5200 messages). But I think these numbers are flawed, as it is very likely that much more people on the git mailing list are using git-send-email, while on the kernel list, a lot of patches do not even come from git. To put it another way, we shouldn't take the numbers from the git mailing list samples as an indicator on the style preferred by the *readers*. The numbers that can be counted only show what the *senders* thought would be acceptable to the readers, nothing more. If you are advocating to change the default, please take the discussion to the git mailing list. As I already said, I personally am in favor of the shallow kind, but I do not run dictatorship over there. Also we cannot make a change based solely on what the kernel people have recently done these days; it is not year 2005 anymore and git is used by other projects as well. Just like the kernel folks take regressions seriously to the point to say breaking one person's working setup is worse than fixing a known bug that affects many more people, I take changing any default seriously. Most discussions to change the default come from poeple who do not like the default for obvious reasons, and it is difficult to judge if there is a silent majority that is content with the current behaviour, or everybody is unhappy but only some care deeply enough to make loud noises about it. We cannot tell these two cases apart very easily by only listening to the loudness of voices of complaining people. Thanks.