Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] add a --delete option to git push

From: Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com>
Date: Aug 14, 2009, 07:05 UTC
Message-ID: <fabb9a1e0908140005n18a53128n840c2e4ffbe1889a@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vab22ubr5.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Heya,

On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 23:53, Junio C Hamano<gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

> I doubt that assumption is warranted.  I've seen new people on this list
> who want to be as specific as possible before they get familiar with the
> tool (I guess it is in the same spirit that they like to spell out long
> option names instead of short ones).

Fair enough.

> Your "old:new" demonstrates a fuzzy understanding of the underlying
> concept.  They are not <old> nor <new>.  They are <object name> and
> <destination>; with this object, update that destination.

Not really, I was responding to Jeff's "you can rename a branch like this", I know that in <left>:<right> the <left> can be anything that locally resolves to an object, and that <right> can be any valid ref on the remote side, but that's quite a mouthful :P.

> Also --delete should imply not
> looking at configured refspecs at all.  After all, this is incompatible
> with the way git expresses push with refspecs, and trying to mix these two
> would lead to confusion.

Agreed, I don't think "git push --delete origin master:master to-be-deleted" is a good idea.

Show 11 quoted lines

> [...] Being able to
> say "git push --delete branch1 branch2" matches _a_ mental model (perhaps
> Hg inspired one) _very_ naturally.  [...]
>
> [...] In
> git model, you give list of instructions <which branch to update with what
> commit>, and as a special case "what commit" could be "empty" to signal
> deletion, and "push" carries out the instructions.
>
> These are both valid models.  They just do not mix, so let's avoid
> confusion by not allowing both at the same time.

Agreed, would it be enough to ensure that there are refs present (as argument), and that they do not contain a colon?

Also, how do I go about making sure the local configuration is ignored, as you mentioned above?

-- 
Cheers,

Sverre Rabbelier