From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/2] add a --delete option to git push Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 03:01:10 -0400 Message-ID: <20090814070109.GC7113@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <1250226349-20397-1-git-send-email-srabbelier@gmail.com> <1250226349-20397-2-git-send-email-srabbelier@gmail.com> <7vab22ubr5.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090814070021.GB7113@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Sverre Rabbelier , Jakub Narebski , Git List To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Aug 14 09:01:19 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Mbqms-0002FZ-Uv for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 09:01:19 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932191AbZHNHBL (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Aug 2009 03:01:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755487AbZHNHBK (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Aug 2009 03:01:10 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:57020 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755459AbZHNHBK (ORCPT ); Fri, 14 Aug 2009 03:01:10 -0400 Received: (qmail 15437 invoked by uid 107); 14 Aug 2009 07:01:13 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Fri, 14 Aug 2009 03:01:13 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 14 Aug 2009 03:01:10 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090814070021.GB7113@coredump.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 03:00:21AM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > Thank you for succintly explaining what I was trying to put my finger on > elsewhere in the thread. To sum up what I was trying to say: > > I don't have anything against the "delete mode" mental model, but I > don't have a particular use for it. My counter-proposal was "syntactic > sugar without changing the mental model". Between the two, I don't have > a strong feeling (and my "this is wrong" comments were about where you > had mixed the two, and I think you agreed with them). To clarify: "you" in the first paragraph is Junio, and in the second it is Sverre. :) -Peff