Re: [RFC/PATCH] push: introduce implicit push

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 15, 2013, 17:18 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMP44s3J=+U5sM69ZMd3-joG=PHOxyebdvxcCOiqfd4yz2pygA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20130415171348.GI2278@serenity.lan>

On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 12:13 PM, John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk> wrote:

Show 18 quoted lines

> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 11:39:40AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 15, 2013 at 4:59 AM, John Keeping <john@keeping.me.uk> wrote:
>>
>> > So the question is "what is the natural extension of the current
>> > behaviour?", and the answer for me is "it's completely new", but others
>> > have different (and conflicting) internal models that give different
>> > answers.
>>
>> I don't think this does anybody any service. If the current behavior
>> is wrong, and if users all over the Internet is any indication, it is;
>> we do not want to continue such bad behavior. If the new
>> functionality has a different behavior, it only makes sense to change
>> the old behavior to make it consistent.
>
> The current "push.default = matching" behaviour may be wrong, but I
> haven't seen anyone say that the fundamental "'git push' does something
> depending on push.default" and "'git push there ref...' specifies
> exactly what to do" is broken.

Maybe not, but that doesn't mean that the new behavior should be limited by the old one. If there's an ideal new behavior, the old one should eventually be updated to accommodate the new one.

-- 
Felipe Contreras