From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Paolo Bonzini Subject: Re: push.default??? Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:55:30 +0200 Message-ID: <4A3FC592.10401@gnu.org> References: <7vws74cjrl.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Jun 22 19:55:51 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 1MInkE-0006QU-3g for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:55:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752950AbZFVRzj (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:55:39 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752702AbZFVRzj (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:55:39 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:52572 "EHLO mx2.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751551AbZFVRzj (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:55:39 -0400 Received: from int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (int-mx2.corp.redhat.com [172.16.27.26]) by mx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5MHte4G005354; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:55:40 -0400 Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx2.corp.redhat.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id n5MHtdEJ030197; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:55:39 -0400 Received: from yakj.usersys.redhat.com (dhcp-lab-149.englab.brq.redhat.com [10.34.33.149]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id n5MHtcRA024994; Mon, 22 Jun 2009 13:55:38 -0400 User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.17 (X11/20081009) In-Reply-To: <7vws74cjrl.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.58 on 172.16.27.26 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: > You cannot do anything "in 1.6.3"; The ship has already left the port. Yes, that was me reasoning out loud. >> 4) in 1.6.4 or 1.7.0, make "git push" fail outright if there is no >> push line, with text suggesting > > This was already part of one possible option for push.default (change the > built-in default to 'nothing-and-warn') when it was introduced, wasn't it? > Instead of suggesting to configure remote.$name.push, it would suggest to > set push.default to a desired value, which I think is a more sensible > thing to do. Yes, that was also reasoning out loud. It makes sense. Anyway, suggestion will be helpful for the "tracking" behavior refspec syntax. Thanks for the remarks, Paolo