From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 18:14:42 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] remote: add new sync command
Message-ID: <20111108181442.GA17317@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAMP44s089xbEo4VT8rqgS=BJMUu=qsb8Hm5z8bTR2akU8-5QhA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Nov 08, 2011 at 07:31:09PM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote:

> >  2. update remote refs with local values, including pushing anything
> >     new that we don't have locally (--sync-new)
> 
> Anything new that we don't have *remotely*.

Sorry, yeah.

> >  1. git push --prune <remote> :
> >
> >     I.e., use the "matching" refspec to not push new things, but turn
> >     on pruning.
> 
> I guess so, but ":" seems a bit obscure.

Yeah, it is. It's also the default, so you could just do:

  git push --prune <remote>

Although some people have argued for changing the default in future
versions. I don't know what the status of that is.

> >  2. git push <remote> refs/heads/*
> >
> >     Turn off pruning, but use an explicit refspec, not just "matching",
> >     which will push all local branches.
> 
> Isn't refs/heads/* the same as --all? BTW. I think --all is confusing,
> should be --branches, or something.

Doesn't --all mean all refs, including tags and branches? I thought that
was the thing you were avoiding. We could add syntactic sugar to make
--branches mean "refs/heads/*". But I do worry that pseudo-options like
that just end up creating more confusion (I seem to recall there being a
lot of confusion about "--tags", which is more or less the same thing).

-Peff