Re: [PATCH] push: allow atomic flag via configuration

From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
Date: Mar 24, 2017, 18:53 UTC
Message-ID: <20170324185354.GE31294@aiede.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <20170324184550.3l6mw4ybynizblsm@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Hi,

Jeff King wrote:

> On Fri, Mar 24, 2017 at 06:17:54PM +0100, Romuald Brunet wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

>> Added a "push.atomic" option to git-config to allow site-specific
>> configuration of the atomic flag of git push
>
> I don't really use --atomic myself, but this seems like a reasonable
> thing to want, and the implementation looks cleanly done.
>
> My one question would be whether people would want this to actually be
> specific to a particular remote, and not just on for a given repository
> (your "site-specific" in the description made me think of that). In that
> case it would be better as part of the remote.* config.

I didn't receive the original patch (maybe mailing delay?) so commenting here.

I use --atomic sometimes, but it's tied to the specific context of what I'm trying to push.

I'd be interested to hear more about the use case. Do you want pushes to be atomic opportunistically when the server supports that (analogous to push.gpgSign=if-asked)?

This also seems likely to break scripts that rely on the current non-atomic behavior, so without knowing more about the use case it's hard to see how to proceed.

Thanks and hope that helps, Jonathan