Luckily it’s an open source project so you could go in and clean up the ux.

andrewflnr 27 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

Great, then your choices are (a) try and probably fail to get your changes upstreamed and/or (b) maintain your own fork of git forever.

This is very much a "if you don't like X about your country, just move to a different one" kind of "solution". The costs are extreme to the point that pretending it's viable is insulting. Really it's just a way to silence legitimate complaints.

	▲	4 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		[deleted]

▲

LtdJorge 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Probably unacceptable as many would have built tooling around the specific default behaviors.

▲

throw_await 40 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

If tooling is relying on the output format of porcelain commands, it's wrong. The output of various subcommands have already changed more than once.

▲

Jaxan 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You can have your own version. You don’t have to push all improvements upstream.

	▲	swiftcoder an hour ago \| parent [-]
		It's not really feasible to maintain private forks of every piece of software you use (especially something like git that needs regular security patches)