Johannes Sixt <johannes.sixt@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Sunday 18 March 2007 21:37, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Johannes Sixt <johannes.sixt@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>> > The hunk that reads the 'Push'es from the .git/remotes file is taken
>> > almost verbatim from the corresponding 'Pull' clause and is untested.
>>
>> Maybe while waiting for application nor comments you could have
>> tested and removed that comment?
>
> Fair enough ;)
>
> While waiting for application or comments again, I did test
> now, and the patch does what I expect even for .git/remotes
> files, that is, it prints the refs to be pushed just like it
> does for remotes noted in the config file.
Thanks, and sorry for that comment as I was in a grumpy mood.
Let's queue it in 'next', as I do not see anything obviously
wrong with it [*1*].
Now let's find other people who find this new feature
desirable. I am personally neutral right now.
[Footnote]
*1* Actually I think the refspec list on "Push: " lines should
be split out into separate array elements, because
Push: A B C
is equivalent to
Push: A
Push: B
Push: C
This does not apply to "Pull: " lines, as
Pull: A B C
and
Pull: A
Pull: B
Pull: C
mean quite different things.
This distinction does not matter to the current callers, but I
was hoping that somebody would build "interactive" mode to edit
Push and Pull list, and when that happens, having A B C as
separate entries in @{$hash->{$name}{'PUSH'}} would be handier
to code.
-
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