Re: [RFC/PATCH] remote: add new sync command

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 7, 2011, 20:51 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMP44s0M-qnZeHCUadSJJCYO=t881sUOi11G3fCG2vaAakPyBQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20111107183938.GA5155@sigill.intra.peff.net>

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 8:39 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 08:35:07PM +0200, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>
>> I don't know, seems logical to me what 'git remote sync' does, but
>> 'git push sync'? That sounds weird, and there are no 'git push foo'
>> commands.
>
> What I don't understand is why it is not:
>
>  git push --mirror <URL|remote>

Because that pushes *everything*.

Show 10 quoted lines

>> > And how does this differ from "git push --mirror"? It looks like you
>> > have more options for what pushing all versus pruning, but wouldn't it
>> > be better for "git push" to grow those options?
>>
>> But how? --mirror is just an option, I want a separate command, with
>> it's own options.
>
> That's what I don't understand from your proposal. Your command is just
> pushing something to the remote, right? Why isn't "push" the command,
> and your sync options become options to push?

How exactly? --sync-prune, --sync-new, --sync-all? But actually, I was thinking on adding an option to sync the other way around; to get all the remote branches and have them locally.

> Can you step back and describe the problem you're trying to solve? Maybe
> we're not connecting there.

Well, I usually have quite a lot of branches in my local repositories, like a dozen of so. And I like to back them up in some remote repository, however, not all the branches all the time. git push --mirror not only pushes branches, but also tags (and I don't want that), and even other refs. Does that clarifies things?

-- 
Felipe Contreras