From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: Wishlist for a bundle-only transport mode Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2007 17:26:36 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: <8aa486160711210654p357ccd87i4809e0cda9471303@mail.gmail.com> <200711211752.40264.jnareb@gmail.com> <200711211811.34391.jnareb@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Santi =?iso-8859-1?q?B=E9jar?= , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jakub Narebski X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Nov 21 18:27:09 2007 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 1IutLm-0000Ot-EY for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 21 Nov 2007 18:26:58 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752686AbXKUR0k (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:26:40 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752541AbXKUR0k (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:26:40 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:48077 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751897AbXKUR0j (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Nov 2007 12:26:39 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 21 Nov 2007 17:26:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO [138.251.11.74]) [138.251.11.74] by mail.gmx.net (mp024) with SMTP; 21 Nov 2007 18:26:37 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18MYCZRUNwMsLfKql/JQygBXtdoeiYuIAeSVPLuYr gJowXy1aLMiv4q X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <200711211811.34391.jnareb@gmail.com> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Jakub Narebski wrote: > Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Jakub Narebski wrote: > > > >> That has the disadvantage of pushing to bundle when you make an error > >> in the lastpart of path to existing repository. > > > > As I wrote in another reply, I would not allow overwriting an existing > > file. > > > Specifying a non-existing file should be good enough. > > What I meant here that if you do "git push /some/path/to/rpeo.git", with > mistake in the last part of path to repository, you would end up with a > bundle, and you would have to really watch what happened to catch the > error. I use tab completion all the time, so this would not happen to me. IMHO that is a lesser issue than to introduce a "protocol". > I'd rather use "git push bundle:///some/path/to/bundle" or "git push > --bundle bundlename" to catch errors better. > > Besides it should be IMHO be possible to overwrite bundle if you are > doing fast-forward push... Not as far as I can see. A push there would see what the bundle has already, and put them into the new bundle as _prerequisites_. So the bundle would lose information. BTW this was my gripe (that I decided not to make public earlier) with Santi's proposal to begin with: a push would not have any way to specify what the other side has already. So I think "git push " is the wrong way of creating a bundle. Except if we add some cunning strategy not to overwrite, ever, but to create . with an incrementing . But that might be too much. Ciao, Dscho