"Philip Oakley" <philipoakley@xxxxxxx> writes: > From: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thursday, June 20, 2013 8:23 PM >> Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> Junio C Hamano wrote: >>>> Double negation confused my parser. 'push' and 'pull' should be >>>> kept symmetrical in central workflows? >>> >>> They're not the same thing. It is very much intentional and >>> intended: >>> the safety net is not to "ensure that the push and pull are >>> symmetrical" (i.e. among other things, error out if >>> branch.$branch.merge is unset), but rather "ensure that the push and >>> pull are never asymmetrical". >> >> Hmmmm.... >> >> not to "ensure that the push and pull are symmetrical" >> rather "ensure that the push and pull are never asymmetrical". >> >> They still talk the same thing to me. What am I missing? >> >> Am I being clueless, or is there something else going on? > > I think it is a case of the user having explicitly set push=Africa and > pull=Europe which can't be a setting for simple symmetry. Yeah but then that is not a discussion about central workflow. I can understand "In a central workflow push and pull should be symmetrical." I can also, with a bit of double-negation brain twisting, understand "In a central workflow, push and pull should not be asymmetrical." But when I suggest to avoid double-negation, I was told that these two statements mean different things, and the original should not be rewritten to avoid double-negation, which is where my brain stopped and asked for help. -- 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