Hi, On Fri, 30 Jan 2009, Jay Soffian wrote: > On Fri, Jan 30, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Johannes Schindelin > <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > > As Peff commented, this would be horribly wrong if the remote has a > > different "origin" remote. Not forcing the push does not help either, > > it is still wrong. > > Got it. Here was my impression of the work-flow we're trying to help > beginners with: > > machineA$ mkdir repo > machineA$ cd repo > machineA$ git init > machineA$ add, commit, add, commit... > > machineB$ git clone ssh://machine1/repo > machineB$ add, commit, add, commit... > machineB$ git push > > (And if my impression is wrong, then stop me right here and I'll > shut-up on this thread.) I think your impression is not wrong. BUT. You cannot just cater for one workflow and fsck the other workflows over. You'll have to devise a method that helps the workflow you are interested in, but leaves the others alone. Example: the thing I heard most often was "I want to start this repository, but there is nothing in there yet, yet I want other people to clone it already so they'll see something when I do." I admit, it does not strike me sensible, but so does cloning an empty repository. As I could not understand how people would want to vote for Bush. Yet they did, so I guess I'll have to live with it. 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
