Hi, On Wed, 5 Aug 2009, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > On Wed, 5 Aug 2009, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, 5 Aug 2009, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > > > > On Wed, 5 Aug 2009, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, 5 Aug 2009, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > > > > > > > > If this is set, the url is not required, and the transport always > > > > > uses a helper named "git-remote-<value>". > > > > > > > > I wonder what's wrong with saying "git config remote.origin.url p4:" > > > > instead of having two different code paths that do essentially the > > > > same. > > > > > > I believe some cases will want to use a URL which is "http://something"; > > > and have some other option cause the code to use "git helper-svn". > > > > I actually would rather have "svn-http://something"; because it tells me > > right away and in red letters what is happening. > > I think it's much more useful to have the URL that git uses for a > subversion repo be identical to the URL that svn uses for the same repo. > > Of course, users should also be able to use something like > "svn-http://something"; or "svn:http://something";, but I think we'd get a > lot of confusion if we don't support a remote.*.url of exactly what a > svn-using project webpage says their repo url is. And I will _constantly_ be confused when the URL looks the same for Git and for SVN repositories. Adding another config option to specify which helper processes the URL is not helping me in any way. Rather the opposite. Ciao, Dscho -- 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