From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-fetch should not strip off ".git" extension Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2008 09:56:28 -0700 Message-ID: <7vej29zy2r.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <48FC5F1B.1050608@op5.se> <7vzlkz2jv7.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Junio C Hamano" , "Andreas Ericsson" , git@vger.kernel.org To: SLONIK.AZ@gmail.com X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 21 18:58:42 2008 connect(): Connection refused 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 1KsKYP-0004bo-Bd for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 18:57:57 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752343AbYJUQ4p (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:56:45 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752138AbYJUQ4p (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:56:45 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:42859 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751478AbYJUQ4o (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:56:44 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00E567064D; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:56:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-211.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B95EE70646; Tue, 21 Oct 2008 12:56:35 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Leo Razoumov's message of "Tue, 21 Oct 2008 06:23:57 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 3C312922-9F91-11DD-8C44-9CEDC82D7133-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: "Leo Razoumov" writes: > Even though the old behavior is "long established", it introduces > unnecessary ambiguity. If I have two repos > ... Of course. Now you know why people don't name such a pair of repositories like that ;-).