From: Paolo Bonzini Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 16:40:24 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] make "git fetch" update all fetch repositories Message-ID: <48174F78.7020400@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: >>> Some of them point to my colleagues laptops, where temporary >>> git-daemons sometimes serve content, and sometimes it doesn't. >> Again, you should probably have skipDefaultUpdate set on those remotes even >> now! > > Umm, why? Because I don't want to make sure my colleagues *all* have their laptops turned on when I run "git remote update" (on the default group). Those remotes should be fetched individually as the need arises, or maybe with a special group, but not by default. >> A patch that makes a "wrong" (or incomplete) configuration more >> apparent, is not necessarily wrong in itself. > > Your suggested changes are actively _making_ them wrong. They are not > wrong now. Sure, you can consider a configuration that affects "git remote update" to be correct if you're not using "git remote update" at all. But a wrong you never saw/experienced is not a right. My changes are actively making the wrongness apply more broadly, that's clear. > Happily, I am quite certain that Junio will not allow such dramatic > changes into Git, at least not without a long, long time of warning, > during which I can safely undo the changes in my personal branch. I wouldn't be surprised if it didn't go in 1.5.6 -- indeed. Actually I think the "git pull" changes (patches 5 and 6) and the matching refs refspec (patches 1 and 2) can go in sooner, but I sort of expect the other 3 patches to lie in limbo for a longer time. > I absolutely hate the idea of "origin" _not_ being special. Well, Junio and Shawn convinced me of the contrary, so I guess they disagree with you on this one... Paolo