Re: What's cooking in git.git (Mar 2009, #06; Sat, 21)

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mar 24, 2009, 09:02 UTC
Message-ID: <7vljqv2t05.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <7v4oxk6wk2.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

> Finn Arne Gangstad <finnag@pvv.org> writes:
>
>> If you feel that talking about a possible future change is premature,
>> you could omit that part of the second commit I guess, but I think
>> printing some kind of warning is valuable.  Are you waiting for more
>> input?  It seems that this topic is pretty dead now.

Now it turns out that it has been "pretty dead" because nobody, not even the original author, was doing any testing and fixing.

After merging this "warning" thing to next, I mistype the name of the remote I wanted to push with the default "matching" semantics and got this:

  $ git push --dry-run sf.net
  warning: You did not specify any refspecs to push, and the current remote
  warning: has not configured any push refspecs. The default action in this
  warning: case is to push all matching refspecs, that is, all branches
  warning: that exist both locally and remotely will be updated.  This may
  warning: not necessarily be what you want to happen.
  warning:
  warning: You can specify what action you want to take in this case, and
  warning: avoid seeing this message again, by configuring 'push.default' to:
  warning:   'nothing'  : Do not push anythig
  warning:   'matching' : Push all matching branches (default)
  warning:   'tracking' : Push the current branch to whatever it is tracking
  warning:   'current'  : Push the current branch
  fatal: 'sf.net' does not appear to be a git repository
  fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly

The final, most important error messages are dwarfed out by the warning that talks about setting configuration on the remote that does not even exist.

In this particular case, it does not corrupt the local nor remote repositories, and because it was me who tried this who knew what he was doing, so it is Ok, and that is the point of keeping any new features out of 'master' until such silly misfeatures are found and fixed. But it would have been nicer if I weren't the only one testing and finding bugs.