Re: [PATCH 0/6] Reroll of rr/triangular-push-fix

From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 24, 2013, 13:51 UTC
Message-ID: <CALkWK0=L4X=5UrCPygoUeLo9byvRKh4bez0DVB5iqatLvdEEfA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vli60c4gu.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> 'simple' is supposed to be an easy and safe default to help new
> people.  Your original patch to change its semantics for the central
> workflow from the current 'make sure upstream is set and set to the
> same name' to 'anything goes' is making the mode more dangerous than
> the corresponding 'upstream'.  Such a mode may have its place, but
> labelling such a mode with rough edges as 'simple' and forcing it on
> new people _is_ stupid, IMHO.

Oh, I agree that "anything goes" was the wrong approach. However, I think a sane default for branch.$branch.merge is a good way forward.

> In any case, the good news is, if you start strict, and if it turns
> out to be stricter than necessary, it is easier to loosen it later,
> because nobody would be relying on an operation to _fail_.

Okay, I will quote you if you raise issues about "preserving how it has historically been functioning" when I complete the upstream-fix topic.

There's no need to stall this series then: [1/6] to [5/6] largely look good-to-merge; drop [6/6], as it needs more thought.