Felipe Contreras wrote: > The importance of users changes all the time. The 15 year old kid in > Sao Paulo might not be important today, but he might be the single > most important contributor ten years from now. Hell, he might even > replace Junio as the maintainer. Yes, they do. Did I say that they don't change? > Where did I twist anything? You can see Linus talk himself: > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kzKzUBLEzwk Yes, I watched the talk when you posted the link last time. And yes, I learnt something. > Should we willingly and knowingly neglect some git user-base? No, why > would you want them to fork? In a way, git's UI has been so bad, that > some kind-of-forks have happened, that tells us something; the UI > needs some love, fortunately none of those forks worked, which tells > us something too; it's not too atrocious. No, we should never neglect. I believe in including everyone. In fact I take it to an extreme: on many instances, I have pointed out what I want specifically, and asked for a configuration option if it's not necessarily a sane default. Git is a toolkit, and should be loaded with features that even a few users want. > That's not to say we shouldn't fix the UI, we should, in a way that > everyone's happy, which is hard, but we will do it, eventually. On this, I think the way forward is complete-implicit'ness via configuration variables. I recently wrote remote.pushdefault to simply 'git push', and proposed 'git push +ref1 ref2 ref3' to automatically push to the correct pushdefaults (but that proposal was rejected). -- 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