Re: [RFC/PATCH] push: introduce implicit push
- From
John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
- Date
- Apr 15, 2013, 17:13 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20130415171348.GI2278@serenity.lan>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAMP44s0u3=FEuifS8KaGy3Y_mjtjeuL1PfChSUco_0TdOXp-jg@mail.gmail.com>
On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:39:40AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
Show 12 quoted lines
> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:59 AM, John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk> wrote: > > > So the question is "what is the natural extension of the current > > behaviour?", and the answer for me is "it's completely new", but others > > have different (and conflicting) internal models that give different > > answers. > > I don't think this does anybody any service. If the current behavior > is wrong, and if users all over the Internet is any indication, it is; > we do not want to continue such bad behavior. If the new > functionality has a different behavior, it only makes sense to change > the old behavior to make it consistent.
The current "push.default = matching" behaviour may be wrong, but I haven't seen anyone say that the fundamental "'git push' does something depending on push.default" and "'git push there ref...' specifies exactly what to do" is broken.