Re: [PATCH 10/10] push: teach push to be quiet if local ref is strict subset of remote ref

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Oct 31, 2007, 18:51 UTC
Message-ID: <7vve8nglrt.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <B3C76DB8-076D-4C43-AC28-99119A05325C@zib.de>

Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@zib.de> writes:

Show 12 quoted lines

> On Oct 31, 2007, at 9:45 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> I would not doubt it would be safer for _your_ workflow, but you
>> should consider the risk of making things more cumbersome for
>> workflows of others by enforcing that policy.
>
> Together with the '--create' flag it would be safer in all
> cases, because it would always do _less_ than what git push
> currently does. The safest choice would be if "git push"
> refused to do anything until configured appropriately.
>
> "safer" is independent of the workflow.

By your definition, a command that does not do anything by default is safer regardless of the workflow.

That may be theoretically true --- it cannot do any harm by default. But that is not useful.

Show 6 quoted lines

> I'm mainly interested in using git against a shared repo,
> and make it as simple and as safe as possible to use in
> such a setup. I suspect that git is more optimized for the
> workflow used for the Linux kernel and for developing git,
> which heavily rely on sending patches to mailing lists and
> pulling fro read-only repos.

You forgot a lot more important part. Pushing into publishing repositories. And the discussion is about git-push command.