On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 10:15:20AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > > > But I wonder if fetching and pushing are different in that respect. You > > are (usually) fetching from a public publishing point, and it is assumed > > that whatever is there is useful for sharing. The only reason to limit > > it is to save time transferring objects the user does not want. > > There are those who have to emulate "git fetch" with a reverse "git > push" (or vice versa) due to network connection limitations, so I do > not think hardcoding such a policy decision in the direction is > necessarily a good idea. Yeah, but I think it makes sense to optimize the defaults for the common cases, and let people doing unusual things override the behavior via options (or even config). Don't get me wrong, I think there is value in the simplicity of having the push/fetch transactions be as symmetric as possible. But given the potentially high cost of a mistaken push (i.e., retracting published history can be embarrassing or complicated), there's also value in safe defaults. And I feel like we've already gone in that direction with the default refspecs being different between fetch and 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