git/list[1] front-page[2] threads[3] people[4] search[5] about
 

Re: [RFC] [PATCH] remote: add new --fetch option for set-url

From
Peter Wu <peter@lekensteyn.nl>
Date
Nov 24, 2014, 23:27 UTC
Message-ID
<283403992.8FOSVk7RPR@al>
In-Reply-To
<20141124225457.GA9942@peff.net>
On Monday 24 November 2014 17:54:57 Jeff King wrote:
Show 23 quoted lines
> On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 11:47:30PM +0100, Peter Wu wrote:
> > I can understand that --fetch sounds a bit weird, what about this
> > natural translation:
> > 
> >     "git remote: set the URL (only the fetch one) for NAME to URL"
> >     git remote set-url --only=fetch NAME URL
> > 
> >     "git remote: set the URL (only the push one) for NAME to URL"
> >     git remote set-url --only=push NAME URL
> >     (obsoletes --push)
> > 
> >     "git remote: set the URL (both) for NAME to URL"
> >     git remote set-url --only=both NAME URL
> >     (it would be nice if --only=both (weird!) can be removed in the
> >     future such that the option is more natural)
> > 
> >     "git remote: set the URL for NAME to URL"
> >     git remote set-url NAME URL
> >     (current behavior: YOU git guru knows what I do right?)
> 
> Yeah, I think that addresses my concern (because it explicitly leaves
> no-option as a historical curiosity, and not as an implicit version of
> "--both").

Ok, I will make a clear note about the default (without --only) behavior having weird behavior for historical reasons. Are you really OK with --only=both? It sounds a bit odd (mathematically speaking it is correct as fetch and push are both partitions that form the whole set if you ignore the historical behavior).

Show 11 quoted lines
> > >   3. Live with it. Probably address the weirdness in the documentation.
> > > 
> > >   4. Do nothing, drop the patch.
> > > 
> > > I think I'd be OK with (3), with an appropriate documentation update.
> > 
> > I prefer 1 for now as it avoids the extra manual action I have to take
> > when changing URLs.
> 
> I'm not sure if I was clear on (3), but "live with it" was "live with
> your original patch". Which I think you would also be happy with.
Oh yes, I misunderstood this one ;)

What about the translations? Should I send a separate patch for that or can I update all translations at once?

-- 
Kind regards,
Peter
https://lekensteyn.nl
Previous: Junio C HamanoNext: Jeff King
Message 19 of 27 in “remote: add new --fetch option for set-url”
  1. Peter WuNov 19, 2014
  2. Jeff KingNov 19, 2014
  3. Peter WuNov 19, 2014
  4. Jeff KingNov 19, 2014
  5. Peter WuNov 19, 2014
  6. Junio C HamanoNov 19, 2014
  7. Peter WuNov 19, 2014
  8. Junio C HamanoNov 19, 2014
  9. Junio C HamanoNov 19, 2014
  10. Junio C HamanoNov 19, 2014
  11. Peter WuNov 19, 2014
  12. Peter WuNov 24, 2014
  13. Junio C HamanoNov 24, 2014
  14. Peter WuNov 24, 2014
  15. Jeff KingNov 24, 2014
  16. Peter WuNov 24, 2014
  17. Jeff KingNov 24, 2014
  18. Junio C HamanoNov 24, 2014
  19. Peter WuNov 24, 2014
  20. Jeff KingNov 25, 2014
  21. Junio C HamanoNov 25, 2014
  22. Jeff KingNov 25, 2014
  23. Peter WuNov 25, 2014
  24. Philip OakleyNov 28, 2014
  25. Peter WuDec 2, 2014
  26. Junio C HamanoDec 2, 2014
  27. Peter WuNov 25, 2014

Read the whole thread, see it on lore, or plain text.

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.