From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Mike Hommey Subject: Re: Allowing push --dry-run through fetch url Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 08:56:07 +0100 Message-ID: <20091109075607.GA16706@glandium.org> References: <20091106073707.GA14881@glandium.org> <7vfx8s0yy1.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20091106095357.GA13389@glandium.org> <7vfx8obz2o.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Nov 09 08:56:37 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1N7P76-00082j-TA for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:56:37 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753902AbZKIH40 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Nov 2009 02:56:26 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753881AbZKIH40 (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Nov 2009 02:56:26 -0500 Received: from vuizook.err.no ([85.19.221.46]:45305 "EHLO vuizook.err.no" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753856AbZKIH4Z (ORCPT ); Mon, 9 Nov 2009 02:56:25 -0500 Received: from cha92-13-88-165-248-19.fbx.proxad.net ([88.165.248.19] helo=jigen) by vuizook.err.no with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1N7P6u-0006ZJ-7l; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:56:27 +0100 Received: from mh by jigen with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1N7P6d-0004Lm-DO; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 08:56:07 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vfx8obz2o.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-GPG-Fingerprint: A479 A824 265C B2A5 FC54 8D1E DE4B DA2C 54FD 2A58 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Spam-Status: (score 0.1): No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=RDNS_DYNAMIC autolearn=disabled version=3.2.4 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Sun, Nov 08, 2009 at 11:23:27AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Mike Hommey writes: > > > Usually, when I run git push --dry-run, it's to check that what follows > > (usually the refspec part) does what I want it to do, such as not pushing > > tags I didn't intend to push(*), and stuff like that. > > Ahh, that one. > > That reminds me of a topic that we discussed but went away without > reaching the conclusion on adding a "confirmation: are you sure this > pushes what you want?" to the command. I had a doubt about the patch back > then which was that it hardcoded a tty interaction and it would be hard to > retrofit it to help GUI frontends (so my suggestion was to use something > like hooks mechanism, perhaps --confirm=this-script and allow it to do its > GUI thing), but thinking about it again, they can always use "expect" to > drive the interaction with the confirmation prompt, so it may not a big > deal after all---we might want to resurrect the topic. How about an option to have the confirmation asked, quite like cp/mv/rm's -i option ? > That was an unrelated, independent thought on your comment, but if we did > so, you might not even have to try to use --dry-run on git:// transport. Sounds like a good trade-off. Cheers Mike