Hi, On Tue, 17 Mar 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> writes: > > > On Wed, 18 Mar 2009, Nanako Shiraishi wrote: > > > >> Quoting Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx>: > >> > >> > On Sat, 14 Mar 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> > > >> >> * fg/push-default (Wed Mar 11 23:01:45 2009 +0100) 1 commit > >> >> - New config push.default to decide default behavior for push > >> >> > >> >> Replaced the old series with the first step to allow a smooth > >> >> transition. Some might argue that this should not give any warning > >> >> but just give users this new configuration to play with first, and > >> >> after we know we are going to switch default some day, start the > >> >> warning. > >> > > >> > IIRC Steffen posted a patch series earlier, where he initialized > >> > remote.origin.push upon clone (I am not sure if he provided a > >> > corresponding patch for checkout --track), but personally, I think > >> > that would be nicer than having a push.default. > >> > >> Isn't recent trend to avoid such inconsistency between behavior in an > >> existing repository and behavior in a newly created repository? For > >> example, Jeff calls such inconsistency in > >> > >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/100339/focus=100433 > >> > >> as "this breaks in my repo, but when I make a test repo it works". > >> Junio even called it 'madness' (^_^;) > > > > My point is that it is _not_ an inconsistency. > > > > It has a default setting. One that already is well established. > > Push the matching refs. > > > > But you can override it by setting the config variable. Which is also > > well established. > > > > The only thing Steffen's patches would have changed would be to set > > the default differently now. > > > > Which is not that much of a 'madness'. > > > > Especially if you think about changing the default, which _will_ make > > for angry users ("why did you change the default? I _liked_ it! > > Please revert _now_!"). > > I cloned my old project to my new machine with a recent git and it > behaves differently. Why did you change the default "git clone" > creates, without telling me? > > Sounds like a huge inconsistency to me. Okay, I'll bite. In my git.git clone on one machine, I have remote.orcz.push = master. I cloned it. There, "git push" does something different. Inconsistent right there, correct? Without any change to git.git. Assume push.default goes in. Nothing changes in my scenario. Inconsistency right there. 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
