On Fri, Apr 26, 2013 at 3:17 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > 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? But you implied we shouldn't care about Thiago (our hypothetical future overlord), because he is among the users we should't care for (right now). >> 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). Indeed, I learned about that, and I tried to use it, but I think there's a lot that is missing, and I don't know myself what would be ideal. I'm starting to think that a branch should have two upstreams; one that is used for rebasing, and another that is used for pushing. But I'm not sure. Eventually, I would like to do 'git push' and I would push different branches to different repositories in different destination branches in a way that requires multiple commands right now 'git push github fc/remote-old/hg:fc/remote/hg', 'git push --prune backup refs/heads/*:refs/heads/* refs/tags/*:refs/tags/*'. And to figure things out I'm also helping; I added the --prune option to push, and I added color to visualize upstream branches in 'git branch'. But I don't think any of those are as important as having a proper 'git stage' command, and getting rid of --cached and --index, which will be a huge effort, but would pay even bigger dividends. Step by step. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras -- 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