From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Teach remote machinery about remotes.default config variable Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2008 18:18:34 -0800 Message-ID: <7v63xzzszp.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <1200022189-2400-1-git-send-email-mlevedahl@gmail.com> <1200022189-2400-2-git-send-email-mlevedahl@gmail.com> <7v1w8o4ws0.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <30e4a070801111252s4e17b9c4m62adeb9032963e66@mail.gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: "Mark Levedahl" X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Jan 12 03:19:26 2008 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 1JDVxz-0002NZ-Rv for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sat, 12 Jan 2008 03:19:24 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751191AbYALCS4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:18:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1762938AbYALCS4 (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:18:56 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.72.237.25]:32929 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750851AbYALCSz (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:18:55 -0500 Received: from a-sasl-quonix (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4794B1C8A; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:18:54 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8AF91C89; Fri, 11 Jan 2008 21:18:50 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <30e4a070801111252s4e17b9c4m62adeb9032963e66@mail.gmail.com> (Mark Levedahl's message of "Fri, 11 Jan 2008 15:52:12 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Mark Levedahl" writes: >> However, it is a bit hard to judge how much of inconvenience it >> really is in your real life that the current behaviour does not >> allow you to. > > I believe I addressed this in the thread with Dscho. Thanks. I have to admit that I happen to agree with Dscho. I do not see this helping to solve communication issues very much.