> So what is your take on this then? Leave as is and keep the fact
that the default depth value changes its default value depending
> on whether or not includePaths is used? That would be option
>
> #3 Keep status quo for value of depth parameter
>
> I raised the concern that the simple @IndexEmbedded is now not valid anymore as well
before. I guess the question is what you give more importance,
> ability to use the annotation with its default values or have consistent default
values which don’t change.
>
> I still think consistency is more important and #2 is the better approach. However,
before going to #1, I would rather join you and keep the status quo
> with #3.
>
> Btw, enforcing a depth or includePath value might have the advantage of creating
smaller (more targeted) indexes, since we less likely include
> fields which are need targeted by a query.
#3 then #2 for me. I really like #3 better though for the reason I explained.
We should bet at horse races together ;)
Tough negotiations. @Sanne, you brought this depth default of 0 up. WDYT?
—Hardy