From: Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org>
Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2009 07:56:07 GMT
Subject: Re: Allowing push --dry-run through fetch url
Message-ID: <20091109075607.GA16706@glandium.org>
In-Reply-To: <7vfx8obz2o.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 11:23:27AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Mike Hommey <mh@glandium.org> writes:
> 
> > Usually, when I run git push --dry-run, it's to check that what follows
> > (usually the refspec part) does what I want it to do, such as not pushing
> > tags I didn't intend to push(*), and stuff like that.
> 
> Ahh, that one.
> 
> That reminds me of a topic that we discussed but went away without
> reaching the conclusion on adding a "confirmation: are you sure this
> pushes what you want?" to the command.  I had a doubt about the patch back
> then which was that it hardcoded a tty interaction and it would be hard to
> retrofit it to help GUI frontends (so my suggestion was to use something
> like hooks mechanism, perhaps --confirm=this-script and allow it to do its
> GUI thing), but thinking about it again, they can always use "expect" to
> drive the interaction with the confirmation prompt, so it may not a big
> deal after all---we might want to resurrect the topic.

How about an option to have the confirmation asked, quite like
cp/mv/rm's -i option ?

> That was an unrelated, independent thought on your comment, but if we did
> so, you might not even have to try to use --dry-run on git:// transport.

Sounds like a good trade-off.

Cheers

Mike