From: Paolo Bonzini Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2008 21:41:57 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] make "git fetch" update all fetch repositories Message-ID: <48179625.3050704@gnu.org> In-Reply-To: <20080429213323.GA2413@steel.home> >> I sent them together to provide a single coherent series and an aim for >> a transition plan -- which I'd prefer to work out with the git >> community, who knows the release mechanics much better than I do. Jeff >> King's reply to the cover letter is a start towards that; your e-mails > > Hmm... Which one do you mean? I cannot find his reply to message-id > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/80720 >> are also a start towards that, even though I don't think your transition >> plan is feasible (also because it would break "git remote update" >> completely). > > Which part of "warn people in git-fetch" will break "git remote update"? > Or what will break after the "git remote add" start setting > skipDefaultUpdate? People will expect the new remotes to be, ehm, updated by "git remote update". > It is not. It seem to propose, instead of fixing existing behaviour, Do you know how to "fix" existing behavior? I mean, I just wonder why as long as I had one remote only, I could write "git push", while now I have to write "git push origin && git push mirror". The patch to "git fetch" comes from this observation too, and I think it is a good idea, even though I'm less attached to it and it would influence my workflow much less. Paolo