From: John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk>
Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2013 17:13:48 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] push: introduce implicit push
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:
> 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.