On Oct 30, 2007, at 9:29 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@xxxxxx> writes:
Pushing a short refname used to create a new ref on on the
remote side if it did not yet exist. If you specified the wrong
branch accidentally it was created. A safety valve that pushes
only existing branches may help to avoid errors.
On the other hand, if you specified a wrong branch that exists
on the remote end accidentally, it still was pushed. Do we want
to have a new "--i-really-want-to-push" option to make it safer?
Maybe not a bad idea ;)
But not as a command line flag but after printing the results
of a '--dry-run' and than asking the user for confirmation:
"do you want to push this?".
I do not think so. Why should a new branch be treated any
differently?
Because "updating an existing branch" and "creating a new branch"
are two slightly different tasks.
If git provides a way to make this difference explicit, it
would be safer to use.
Will drop 1/10 and 2/10 for now.
Then they'll be dropped and I'll rely on the the --dry-run flag.
Or someone else needs to step in and support my point.
Steffen
-
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
