Re: [PATCH 1/9] remote-bzr: trivial cleanups

> Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> The importance of users changes all the time. The 15 year old kid in
>> Sao Paulo might not be important today, but he might be the single
>> most important contributor ten years from now. Hell, he might even
>> replace Junio as the maintainer.
>
> Yes, they do.  Did I say that they don't change?

>> Should we willingly and knowingly neglect some git user-base? No, why
>> would you want them to fork? In a way, git's UI has been so bad, that
>> some kind-of-forks have happened, that tells us something; the UI
>> needs some love, fortunately none of those forks worked, which tells
>> us something too; it's not too atrocious.
>
> No, we should never neglect.  I believe in including everyone.  In
> fact I take it to an extreme: on many instances, I have pointed out
> what I want specifically, and asked for a configuration option if it's
> not necessarily a sane default.  Git is a toolkit, and should be
> loaded with features that even a few users want.
>
>> That's not to say we shouldn't fix the UI, we should, in a way that
>> everyone's happy, which is hard, but we will do it, eventually.
>
> On this, I think the way forward is complete-implicit'ness via
> configuration variables.  I recently wrote remote.pushdefault to
> simply 'git push', and proposed 'git push +ref1 ref2 ref3' to
> automatically push to the correct pushdefaults (but that proposal was
> rejected).