On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 10:53 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Michael J Gruber <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> That being said, I don't mind changing the behaviour of set-url. > > I do not think we want to change the behaviour of set-url. I agree with Michael that changing the set-url behavior would be appropriate here. If I say "--add" this pushUrl, don't I mean to create an additional url which is pushed to? I agree that it makes the config situation messy; this is currently a "clean" sequence, in that it leaves the config unchanged after both steps are completed: git remote set-url --add --push origin /tmp/foo git remote set-url --delete --push origin /tmp/foo If the behavior is changed like Michael suggested, it would not leave the config clean (unless heroic steps were taken to keep track). But I'm not sure that's such a bad thing. In simple command sequences, the results would be clean and the only behavior change is that the initial "--add" really acts like "add" and not "replace". But more complex sequences could be devised which were affected by this change. I'm curious, Junio. Do you think the set-url behavior is correct as-is, or that changing it will cause breakage for some workflows, or that it complicates the operation too much for people who are already used to the config layout? Phil -- 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