From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eugene Sajine Subject: Re: gti push interface inconsistency Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:47:59 -0400 Message-ID: <76c5b8580910262147w4e3ef7a9k8b65f586e893f4fd@mail.gmail.com> References: <76c5b8580910261523s51ac22b5y624ec3502e8fed67@mail.gmail.com> <7veiopd7gs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 27 05:48:06 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 1N2dyY-0006tR-7P for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 27 Oct 2009 05:48:06 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754078AbZJ0Erz (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:47:55 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754027AbZJ0Erz (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:47:55 -0400 Received: from mail-yw0-f202.google.com ([209.85.211.202]:48493 "EHLO mail-yw0-f202.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753718AbZJ0Erz (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Oct 2009 00:47:55 -0400 Received: by ywh40 with SMTP id 40so8951733ywh.33 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:47:59 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:in-reply-to:references :date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=xCKSLc6vnFJT93DRLgGiHf9kuiyIexzadrW68AzcwqM=; b=tchWoiBzBkYMzLq422dddvJb4adZ0TgC+ZO+WRK++TtP1hE+OaJeJEAYiaU3z4B5aq mGjL6ztnhLh8feOSaRyspnFggLp56HmygK8F1Gxd3grGXOHCtVdb28OR8tvyqtvbbBXr 2QM6hbHW99St3+F6GfAFwaTDqp0MTwUx+LGAU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; b=iZWBSImxxs5s6Qq+smVMHFYfsjvzfyf9ozStdwQ/9+gadQHDrudfDiOyIfGHAYX7aJ 5epa/OTDTjYS/jSVTX6HQtzCLeAoODqs1TMpCWmF1h+99ElsZrD1iMIbMYgW4oEs2ZN3 d//Thcnj0ufpEJFV0G+PXGQ7JD+NqrjUvBTr4= Received: by 10.91.161.28 with SMTP id n28mr6179314ago.36.1256618879748; Mon, 26 Oct 2009 21:47:59 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <7veiopd7gs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: > > Probably because git is not smart enough to understand the human language > to notice 't' 'a' 'g' is a tag and cannot be a remote name spelled > incorrectly, or git cannot read your mind and find out that you spelled > a name of the remote correctly but forgot to add the remote first. > ;) did you mean It is not smart enough yet? My question was caused only by the fact that in both situations same object type is transmitted to the origin repo. As understand that it was done this way in order to avoid specifying keys for remote... I.e. "git push origin master" is kinda easier then something like "git push -r origin master" (-r for remote). But if for "git push --tags" the remote is not important (uses origin by default) why it is important for "git push my_tag" or for "git push origin master"? Do you think $ git push master Which would default to origin have a chance to exist? (I would vote for this) Or the correct aproach is to have $ git push origin --tags IMHO, In any case the push operation interface should be consistent. Else it is a bit confusing (untill you didn't step on it and didn't learn the difference). Best regards, Eugene