On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 02:25:59AM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > Jeff King wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 01:49:54AM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > >> Huh, why? Simply because he specified master alongside it? How can > >> we infer what you said in a consistent system? > > > > That's kind of my point. Why would they put two refs together in a > > single push command? Did they mean "I am pushing up master, and since I > > just tagged it, send the tag along, too"? Or did they really mean to > > push them to two different places? If so, why not just run two separate > > push commands? > > I disagree. The protocol was built ground up to support updating > multiple refs in the same git push. Running N separate push commands > is _not_ the same thing at all; it running N times as slowly aside. But I think all of this discussion just reinforces my point. We do not have to agree on what the user intended. But the fact that we do not agree means that out of a sample size of 2 users, we have 2 different things the user expects to happen. If we choose a behavior and say "this makes sense", then the other half of the users are going to be confused or annoyed. -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