Re: [RFC PATCH 0/4] deny push to current branch of non-bare repo

> "Leo Razoumov" <slonik.az@gmail.com> writes:
>
>  > On 11/8/08, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>  >> On Fri, Nov 07, 2008 at 03:16:53PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>  >>
>  >>  > > The FAQ even says "don't do this until you know what you are doing." So
>  >>  > > the safety valve is configurable, so that those who know what they are
>  >>  > > doing can switch it off.
>  >>  >
>  >>  > "We are breaking your existing working setup but you can add a new
>  >>  > configuration to unbreak it" should not be done lightly.  I think as the
>  >>  > end result it is a reasonable thing to aim for for this particular
>  >>  > feature, but we do need a transition plan patch in between that introduces
>  >>  > a step that warns but not forbids.  We can ship 1.6.1 with it and then
>  >>  > switch the default to forbid in 1.6.3, for example.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> Yeah, I was kind of hoping we could assume that anybody relying on this
>  >>  behavior was somewhat insane, and wouldn't be too upset when it broke.
>  >
>  > I do not think that having a work-flow different from yours deserves a
>  > "somewhat insane" label. But let us consider the consequences of
>  > banning push into a (current branch) non-bare repo. To propagate
>  > changes to such a non-bare repo there are two remaining alternatives
>  > neither of which is fully satisfactory:
>  >
>  > (1) Switch target's current branch to something else (prevent a
>  > conflict) before pushing and then restore it back after the push
>  >
>  > (2) Use git-fetch from the target.
>
>
> (3) set the config in the target repository to allow such a push
>     regardless of the git version.
>
>  Remember, I am in the third camp in this topic myself.