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