Re: Please discuss: what "git push" should do when you do not say what to push?

> Andrew Sayers <andrew-git@pileofstuff.org> writes:
>
>> On 18/03/12 18:50, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>>
>>> ... but in short, it is not a problem we can solve
>>> (nor we should be solving), as long as we have a reasonable migration plan
>>> and if the user is locked out of that migration plan---whoever is doing
>>> the locking-out is taking responsibility for these users who are out of
>>> our reach.
>>
>> I take the point that distros have their own support infrastructure, so
>> perhaps this would be a better example:
>>
>> Many administrators in corporate environments will install git from
>> source, because they don't trust RPM/need some feature in the latest
>> version/are just that way inclined.  Having installed it, they tend to
>> sit on that version for a few years ...
>
> The same response applies. These administrators are taking responsibility
> for their users by making them out of our reach.
>
>> ... a
>> slightly better solution:
>>
>> When a user upgrades to a mid- or post-change version of git, I think
>> it's a good idea for them to be warned about the change of behaviour.
>> But new users, and old users with new repositories, gain nothing from
>> the little history lesson.
>
> You are right for new users, but are wrong for old users who aren't aware
> of the switch-over, *and* are harmed by the switch-over.