From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 16:43:25 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] remote: add new sync command
Message-ID: <CAMP44s0vsQ5sfx8arrRDo+-g9Zff_MmCz5t+yghwCMx_pL4Xzg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vhb2f1v7g.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 11:25 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>
>> That makes sense. But I think it fits in with git's current UI to do
>> this via a combination of push options and refspecs. Even if we want to
>> wrap it in some "git remote" command for convenience, I think what
>> you're asking should be implemented as part of "git push".
>
> Yeah, I think it makes sense to give --prune to "push" just like "fetch"
> already has. These two are the primary (and in the ideal world, only)
> operations that talk to the outside world. "remote add -f" might have been
> a tempting "convenience" feature, but I personally think it probably was a
> mistake for the exact reason that letting anything but "push" and "fetch"
> talk to the outside world just invites more confusion. There does not have
> to be 47 different ways to do the same thing.

What about 'git remote update'?

-- 
Felipe Contreras