From: Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi>
Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2008 19:08:16 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] When a remote is added but not fetched, tell the user.
Message-ID: <20080411190816.GA17277@mithlond>
In-Reply-To: <20080411203501.7095b866@localhost>

Gabriel wrote (2008-04-11 20:35 +0200):

> I think the transcript that started the thread makes it clear that
> having "git remote add" not fetching is not the right default. The
> user wants to use a remote repository, and has learned these are
> called "remotes". So he does not have too much trouble
> finding/remembering the command "git remote add <name> <url>". Now
> with the user's goal in mind, it makes no sense to add a remote and
> then not fetch it, because the user definitely wants to do something
> with the remote. By not fetching it, we are surprising the user 

Hmm, I'm quite newbie but I have never expected "git remote add" to
fetch anything. I wouldn't want it to do it automatically. From the
beginning I saw "git remote" as a _configuration_ tool. No doubt it's
common to fetch after configuring a remote but in my mind they are two
logically different steps (configure, fetch/pull) which I think should
be kept separate. Once I have configured something I may want to check
that I did the right thing, then configure some more remotes and maybe
fetch tomorrow. Maybe I don't want to fetch at all but only pull from
that remote. So let's not build ready workflows for users, only
convenient, logical tools.

That said, I don't mind short messages like "use 'git fetch' to obtain
branches" but I don't think that is necessary.