Do you really think that it is a good idea to push down a huge change like
this down everybody else's throat, just because you do not want to type
"git remote ..." but "git fetch ..." in your workflow?
It's not that I don't want. I couldn't care less, but I just don't see
why I should have learnt it in the first place.
I wonder this a bit, too, and I am even somebody who _likes_ the new
behavior. But there is a difference between "should have been designed
this way in the first place" and "is currently designed some other way,
and will cause pain to switch it to this way."
Agreed.
So it might simply not be worth the trouble to change. OTOH, I think
this is how we end up with many commands to do slightly different
things, which can end up confusing new users. I'm not sure what the
right answer is.
Well, the thing is, push and fetch are different, so expecting the same
behaviour and syntax from them is a lost cause to begin with. Even if we
were designing fetch and push right now, I do not necessarily think the
series shows a way that "should have been designed in the first place".
To me, "push and pull" are different obviously (because pull modifies
two refs, the remote one and the local one). But "push and fetch" are
not so different, so I do expect lots of different options but the gist
of the command-line syntax to be the same.
There are definitely uncontroversial changes in the series, we can start
from there.
Paolo
--
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
