From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Francesco Mazzoli <f@mazzo.li>
Cc: Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] push: add config option to --force-with-lease by default.
Date: Wed, 05 Jul 2017 08:17:10 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqa84ikj61.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAPB=P5z7MA+TuVaFLUQQdOoJXUb74YxEPS6k4O+NorneVpLitg@mail.gmail.com> (Francesco Mazzoli's message of "Wed, 5 Jul 2017 10:04:32 +0200")
Francesco Mazzoli <f@mazzo.li> writes:
> So we would have something like
>
> * `push.disableForce`: config flag that disables `--force` and suggests
> `--force-with-lease` instead;
> * `--disable-force` and `--no-disable-force`, config flags to tune the above
> config parameter at will.
>
> What do you think?
The take-away lesson that the earlier thread gave me was that the
order in which the three options are ranked by their desirebility
in the UI (and the order we would like to encourage users to use)
is, from the most to the least preferrable:
- "--force-with-lease=<ref>:<expect>" that is safer than "--force";
- "--force" that is known to be dangerous, and does not pretend to
be anything but;
- "--force-with-lease" that pretends to be safer but is not.
The last form should eventually be eliminated, as there is no way to
correctly intuit what the expected object should be.
To me, a disableForce configuration that encourages use of either
the best one or the worst one alone does not look like a step
forward, unless we also have a change to disable the last form.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-05 15:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 17+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-03 21:18 [PATCH] push: add config option to --force-with-lease by default Francesco Mazzoli
2017-07-03 21:47 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-07-03 21:57 ` Francesco Mazzoli
2017-07-03 22:08 ` Francesco Mazzoli
2017-07-03 22:15 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-07-03 22:28 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-07-04 17:51 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-05 6:34 ` Francesco Mazzoli
2017-07-05 7:43 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-05 8:04 ` Francesco Mazzoli
2017-07-05 15:17 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2017-07-05 16:43 ` Francesco Mazzoli
2017-07-05 18:51 ` Mike Rappazzo
2017-07-06 19:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2017-07-07 6:19 ` Francesco Mazzoli
2017-07-05 11:26 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
2017-07-05 15:48 ` Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=xmqqa84ikj61.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=f@mazzo.li \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.