On Mon, 2007-06-11 at 19:40, Linus Torvalds wrote: > That said, I don't think that's necessarily the right answer in the longer > run. It's how git people do things, but it's not necessarily the *best* > way of doing things. I think the better solution in the longer term is to > simply improve how "git push" works: > > - we should probably do the same kinds of .git/config file entries for > pushing as we do for fetching, and just get rid of the old implicit > model, and instead have a nice refspec pattern model for what gets > pushed instead. Yeah, the other day I was baffled briefly by the fact that I added a remote to my config using "git remote add ..." with the intent of using it for pushing to a publishing site. I forgot that it set up fetch only refs. Maybe a new "--push" flag to 'git remote add --push ..." to indicated the intended flow direction for a remote? > anyway, I think the _proper_ thing to do would be to associate each > [remote] entry in the config file with a "push" refspec pattern, the way > we do for "fetch" already. nod jdl - 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
