Re: Please discuss: what "git push" should do when you do not say what to push?

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:

> Most of our users are either never going to see this warning because
> their OS will skip the whole of steps 2-6, or worse yet their OS
> might upgrade Git between steps 2-5 and they'll be stuck watching the
> warning it for 1-6 years, or however long their upstream vendor takes
> up upgrade.
>
> I think a better strategy would be to just announce that we're going
> to change it, and then just change it without any intermediate
> steps.

You are only arguing that what we do does not matter much to Distro users,
and you already read that I agreed with that. It's really up to the distro
to make sure their release cycle does not harm the users.

But does that mean we won't have to help our own users who do not depend
on distros with a gentler approach?  I don't think so.

Just like we say we would want to see Perl 5.8.3 or newer for unicode
purposes, it would be sufficient if our announce says Git 1.8.x and later
gives an updated default behaviour to help new people by avoiding a harder
to understand error modes when used in the simplest workflow.