On Mon, Nov 07, 2011 at 01:25:23PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > That makes sense. But I think it fits in with git's current UI to do > > this via a combination of push options and refspecs. Even if we want to > > wrap it in some "git remote" command for convenience, I think what > > you're asking should be implemented as part of "git push". > > Yeah, I think it makes sense to give --prune to "push" just like "fetch" > already has. These two are the primary (and in the ideal world, only) > operations that talk to the outside world. "remote add -f" might have been > a tempting "convenience" feature, but I personally think it probably was a > mistake for the exact reason that letting anything but "push" and "fetch" > talk to the outside world just invites more confusion. There does not have > to be 47 different ways to do the same thing. I don't mind "add -f" too much, which is at least very clear that it is simply a convenience feature for "git remote add foo && git fetch foo". But the other "git remote" features like "set-head -a", which can't be done any other way, or the "auto-check-what-the-remote-has" feature of "git remote show" are a little gross. Anyway, I think we are on the same page; this feature (and btw, I think this is a great feature that we should have) should go into "push". -Peff -- 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