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

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

Andrew Sayers <andrew-git@pileofstuff.org> writes:

> On 18/03/12 18:50, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> 
>> ... but in short, it is not a problem we can solve
>> (nor we should be solving), as long as we have a reasonable migration plan
>> and if the user is locked out of that migration plan---whoever is doing
>> the locking-out is taking responsibility for these users who are out of
>> our reach.
>
> I take the point that distros have their own support infrastructure, so
> perhaps this would be a better example:
>
> Many administrators in corporate environments will install git from
> source, because they don't trust RPM/need some feature in the latest
> version/are just that way inclined.  Having installed it, they tend to
> sit on that version for a few years ...

The same response applies. These administrators are taking responsibility
for their users by making them out of our reach.

> ... a
> slightly better solution:
>
> When a user upgrades to a mid- or post-change version of git, I think
> it's a good idea for them to be warned about the change of behaviour.
> But new users, and old users with new repositories, gain nothing from
> the little history lesson.

You are right for new users, but are wrong for old users who aren't aware
of the switch-over, *and* are harmed by the switch-over.