5 ms·

Seems like a standard git thing: have a process that works in a specific, but not a “helpful” way and also have a undiscoverable setting to configure said proce

Seems like a standard git thing: have a process that works in a specific, but not a “helpful” way and also have a undiscoverable setting to configure said process. Is that why people keep building UIs and wrappers for git?

TylerE 4y ago
Having lots of config is fine, even good, if you ship sane defaults. Frankly most OSS flunks this, and git is one of the biggest offenders.
- rjh29 4y ago
  Git has so many users that changing defaults is pretty tricky. They have done it in the past but usually over multiple release cycles with a deprecation window.
  - skissane 4y ago
    Maybe they should introduce an option to configure which set of defaults is used. e.g. defaults=traditional adopts current defaults (that maximise backward compatibility) defaults=latest adopts latest recommended defaults (better out-of-box user experience, but may break things which depend on the traditional settings) Then at least there is only one setting to change to get sane defaults. Maybe even, defaults=VERSION to give you latest defaults as per that version.
    - nordsieck 4y ago
      > Maybe they should introduce an option to configure which set of defaults is used. > ... > Then at least there is only one setting to change to get sane defaults. I suspect that, much like C++, there will be fierce debate over exactly what constitutes sane defaults.
      - bacon_waffle 4y ago
        Maybe there could be a "C++ style defaults" set of configuration, as default?
- jamesfinlayson 4y ago
  Like Apache's default settings working well for a site that gets no more than one visitor a minute.
- kenzniik 4y ago
  Ah yes, like how nginx’s defaults still like to pretend it’s early 2000s, everyone uses dialup, and nobody could possibly want their website to serve more than a handful of requests per hour.
stevage 4y ago
Yep. The default options are usually the wrong ones.

TylerE 4y ago

Having lots of config is fine, even good, if you ship sane defaults. Frankly most OSS flunks this, and git is one of the biggest offenders.

rjh29 4y ago
Git has so many users that changing defaults is pretty tricky. They have done it in the past but usually over multiple release cycles with a deprecation window.
- skissane 4y ago
  Maybe they should introduce an option to configure which set of defaults is used. e.g. defaults=traditional adopts current defaults (that maximise backward compatibility) defaults=latest adopts latest recommended defaults (better out-of-box user experience, but may break things which depend on the traditional settings) Then at least there is only one setting to change to get sane defaults. Maybe even, defaults=VERSION to give you latest defaults as per that version.
  - nordsieck 4y ago
    > Maybe they should introduce an option to configure which set of defaults is used. > ... > Then at least there is only one setting to change to get sane defaults. I suspect that, much like C++, there will be fierce debate over exactly what constitutes sane defaults.
    - bacon_waffle 4y ago
      Maybe there could be a "C++ style defaults" set of configuration, as default?
jamesfinlayson 4y ago
Like Apache's default settings working well for a site that gets no more than one visitor a minute.
kenzniik 4y ago
Ah yes, like how nginx’s defaults still like to pretend it’s early 2000s, everyone uses dialup, and nobody could possibly want their website to serve more than a handful of requests per hour.

stevage 4y ago

Yep. The default options are usually the wrong ones.