From: Andreas Ericsson Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 08:48:54 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] make "git fetch" update all fetch repositories Message-ID: <4816E0F6.3030302@op5.se> In-Reply-To: <4816D505.1000208@gnu.org> Paolo Bonzini wrote: > >>> Man, that's what release notes are for. You are expected to read those. >> >> So you actually read the release-notes for every application you have >> installed? > > Not for every one, but I do for some applications. Right now only git > and autoconf come to mind. Especially searching for the magic words > "backwards incompatible" -- the more "power user" you are of an > application, the more you should read the release notes. And in the > case of git I don't consider myself a power user but I learnt quite a > few tricks from the release notes. > >> Remind me to never employ you. I doubt you'd ever get any >> work done. > > Well, the same should apply to reading mailing lists... > >> Failing that, would you get slightly annoyed, or perhaps even quite >> vexed if you find out that insert-program-used-to-do-some-work-with-here >> did omething stupid that made you lose some of your work? > > Sorry, how does the patch make you lose some of your work (as opposed to > some of your time, which is possible as is the case for every backwards > incompatible change)? > Because I will lose some of the refs and then have to dig them up in the reflog. > 1) what about the reflog? > I'm not comfortable with the reflog. I appreciate its usefulness, but I'm thoroughly unhappy when I'm forced to use it. > 2) the patch does not touch refs/heads/* unless you are tweaking your > configuration (and quite heavily so). IMHO that's using enough rope > that you really ought to know about the reflog and... look for backwards > incompatible changes in the release notes! > No, but it does touch refs/remotes/*/heads > 3) your complaint was that it gave errors. Alex did talk about losing > his work, but questions 1 and 2 would apply to him too. > > 4) one man's stupidity is another man's... [fill in] In particular, did > you understand the rationale for this change? Do you have any > alternative ideas? > Yes, I understand the rationale, and I do have an alternative idea, which is to make it configurable. Now that I think about it, it's probably useful to have it togglable via command-line switch as well. Something along the lines of "git fetch --all-remotes", perhaps. I'm not against the idea as such. I'm against making it the default. -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231