From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Larry D'Anna Subject: Re: [PATCH] fix an error message in git-push so it goes to stderr Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 14:50:04 -0500 Message-ID: <20100205195004.GA21772@cthulhu> References: <20100205004140.GA2841@cthulhu> <20100205150638.GB14116@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20100205193950.GA18108@cthulhu> <20100205194824.GD24474@coredump.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Feb 05 20:50:19 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NdUBz-0000Hc-6R for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Feb 2010 20:50:15 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755804Ab0BETuH (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Feb 2010 14:50:07 -0500 Received: from cthulhu.elder-gods.org ([140.239.99.253]:56899 "EHLO cthulhu.elder-gods.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755787Ab0BETuG (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Feb 2010 14:50:06 -0500 Received: by cthulhu.elder-gods.org (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AACEE82217D; Fri, 5 Feb 2010 14:50:04 -0500 (EST) Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100205194824.GD24474@coredump.intra.peff.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: * Jeff King (jrk@wrek.org) [100205 14:48]: > On Fri, Feb 05, 2010 at 02:39:50PM -0500, Larry D'Anna wrote: > > > Also it seems to me that git push --dry-run --porcelain should exit successfully > > even if it knows some refs will be rejected. The calling script can see just > > fine for itself that they will be rejected, and it probably still wants to know > > whether or not the dry-run succeeded, which has nothing to do with whether or > > not the same push would succeed as a not-dry-run. > > I think that is OK, but only if "git push --dry-run" still exits with an > error case, since people may be using it for "will this push work?" and > not simply "did an error occur?". Yup. That's exactly what the patch I just posted does. --larry