Finn Arne Gangstad <finnag@xxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Apr 07, 2009 at 07:16:21PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Finn Arne Gangstad <finnag@xxxxxxx> writes: >> >> > @@ -1227,8 +1229,11 @@ static int update(int argc, const char **argv) >> > >> > remote_group.list = &list; >> > for (i = 1; i < argc; i++) { >> > + int groups_found = 0; >> > remote_group.name = argv[i]; >> > - result = git_config(get_remote_group, NULL); >> > + result = git_config(get_remote_group, &groups_found); >> > + if (!groups_found && (i != 1 || strcmp(argv[1], "default"))) >> > + die("No such remote group: '%s'", argv[i]); >> >> I think you are trying to be silent about the case where the caller feeds >> you the default_argv[] array with this, but do we want to be more explicit >> about this so that we do die when the end user explicitly says "default" >> from the command line? > > Are you thinking that "git remote update default" should only be allowed > if you have configured a group named default? I have no preference either way, and that is why I asked. "git remote update" without explicit "default" is obviously what your code try not to say "No such remote group" to, and that probably is a sane thing to do. I don't know what users want to see when they say "default" explicitly without having an explicit configuration. Should it do the same thing as "git remote update"? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html