Re: [RFC - draft] List of proposed future changes that are backward incompatible
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Feb 15, 2009, 23:36 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7v3aefi87g.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <alpine.DEB.1.00.0902152358330.10279@pacific.mpi-cbg.de>
Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
Show 31 quoted lines
> Hi, > > On Sun, 15 Feb 2009, david@lang.hm wrote: > >> On Sun, 15 Feb 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >> > Thanks. >> > >> > * git-push to update the checked out branch will be refused by default >> > >> > Make "git push" into a repository to update the branch that is checked >> > out fail by default. >> > >> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/107758/focus=108007 >> >> If I understand this one, it will cause grief for quite a few people. >> >> I have a public repository that I push to and then have a trigger that checks >> out the current version, compiles it, publishes the compiled version, sends an >> announcement, etc > > So you have to set a config variable. Big deal. > > Compared to that, the thousands of new Git users will no longer be bitten > by the "do not push to a non-bare repository" issue without a useful error > message. > > Please, please, publicize that if there is somebody who is doing the same > as you (which I deem a dangerous workflow; I certainly do not use it > myself) that they will have to adjust their receive.denyCurrentBranch > variable.
Yuck. I wasn't expecting a discussion itself here. This was a request for help and comment for a future message that will ask to start the discussion.
No need to *stop* discussing, but please retitle the thread so that we can later see which ones are discussion of a particular topic, and which ones are proposal for addition of new items.