From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Joachim Schmitz" Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 11/13] remote-hg: force remote push Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2013 08:31:48 +0200 Message-ID: References: <1365089422-8250-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <1365089422-8250-12-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <87y5cyqhya.fsf@59A2.org> <87ppyaqcie.fsf@59A2.org> <87li8yqayf.fsf@59A2.org> <87eheqq6dk.fsf@59A2.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Apr 05 08:32:42 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UO0CV-0003Q9-QR for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 08:32:40 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1161578Ab3DEGcK (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Apr 2013 02:32:10 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:45511 "EHLO plane.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1161148Ab3DEGcJ (ORCPT ); Fri, 5 Apr 2013 02:32:09 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UO0CN-0003Iy-QK for git@vger.kernel.org; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 08:32:31 +0200 Received: from dsdf-4db54c8b.pool.mediaways.net ([77.181.76.139]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 08:32:31 +0200 Received: from jojo by dsdf-4db54c8b.pool.mediaways.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 05 Apr 2013 08:32:31 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: dsdf-4db54c8b.pool.mediaways.net X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jed Brown wrote: > Felipe Contreras writes: > >> On Thu, Apr 4, 2013 at 2:48 PM, Jed Brown wrote: ... >>> We have >>> to assume that every Git (remote-hg) User is dealing with Hg Team >> >> No, we don't. > > Really? If there is no Hg Team, why bother with an Hg upstream? Huh? the counterpart of "every user" wpuld be "some users" and not "no user" or "no HG team", isn't it?