Hi, On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Jakub Narebski wrote: > Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Jakub Narebski wrote: > > > >> That has the disadvantage of pushing to bundle when you make an error > >> in the lastpart of path to existing repository. > > > > As I wrote in another reply, I would not allow overwriting an existing > > file. > > > Specifying a non-existing file should be good enough. > > What I meant here that if you do "git push /some/path/to/rpeo.git", with > mistake in the last part of path to repository, you would end up with a > bundle, and you would have to really watch what happened to catch the > error. I use tab completion all the time, so this would not happen to me. IMHO that is a lesser issue than to introduce a "protocol". > I'd rather use "git push bundle:///some/path/to/bundle" or "git push > --bundle bundlename" to catch errors better. > > Besides it should be IMHO be possible to overwrite bundle if you are > doing fast-forward push... Not as far as I can see. A push there would see what the bundle has already, and put them into the new bundle as _prerequisites_. So the bundle would lose information. BTW this was my gripe (that I decided not to make public earlier) with Santi's proposal to begin with: a push would not have any way to specify what the other side has already. So I think "git push <bundle>" is the wrong way of creating a bundle. Except if we add some cunning strategy not to overwrite, ever, but to create <bundle>.<n> with an incrementing <n>. But that might be too much. Ciao, Dscho - 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
