Re: [PATCH] remote-bzr: use proper push method

> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 4:11 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
>> Thomas Rast <trast@inf.ethz.ch> writes:
>>
>>> Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Not just randomly synchronize the revisions with no checks at all. This
>>>> is the way bazaar's UI does it.
>>>>
>>>> Also, add a non-ff check.
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> This patch should probably go to maint, as the results of pushing the way we
>>>> currently push are not really understood. Perhaps it's similar to a 'git push
>>>>  --force', or perhaps it can potentially screw the repository.
>>>>
>>>> It's better to be safe and just do what bazaar does.
>>>
>>> Other than "this patch should probably go to maint", this should be in
>>> the commit message.
>>
>> Hmph, should it?
>>
>> I do not quite understand what "... are not really understood.
>> Perhaps..." wants to say.  Understood by whom?  By the author of the
>> patch?  By the author of the original code?
>>
>> The log would end up saying "Doing the same as bazaar should be the
>> right thing to do(TM), but don't ask me why.  I do not know what I
>> am doing, or why checking is better than not checking, but it seems
>> to work".  That _could_ be the truth, but it won't help people who
>> are reading the code later, will it?
>
> In addition to that, it's doubtful there's anybody who would actually
> know. Bazaar is basically a dead and unmaintained project now, and it
> has been for quite some time. It seems the people that had any idea
> are long gone.
>
> My gut feeling is that we should do it the way the Bazaar UI does it,
> I don't have any evidence that there's anything wrong with the current
> code, which Bazaar seems to but have, but for different purposes which
> are hard to explain. I would rather avoid surprises.