On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 11:26:25AM -0800, Chris Torek wrote: > On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 10:52 AM Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > If we were starting from scratch, then I think that might have been > > nicer, because --default-remote would be implied if there is no > > "--remote" option. And then my lazy-to-type: > > > > git fetch topic > > > > would just work. But given that we have the positional <remote> > > parameter already, I don't think adding --remote gives much value. And > > it raises the question of what "git fetch --remote=foo --remote=bar" > > means (I think the answer is last-one-wins). > > Since `git fetch` can fetch from more than one remote, it seems to me > to make more sense to mean "fetch from each". Ah, right, I forgot that --multiple existed. Without it, specifying multiple remotes makes no sense at all. But perhaps giving multiple --remote would implicitly specify "--multiple". That makes sense to me. > (This isn't necessarily an argument in favor of adding these options, > just my suggestion for what multiple `--remote=` settings would mean.) Likewise. "makes sense" above mostly means I would not object to it, but I am not advocating for it. :) -Peff
