From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: git push default behaviour? Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2012 01:57:16 -0800 Message-ID: <7vwr6u6qrn.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <87k42vs8pi.fsf@thomas.inf.ethz.ch> <1331202483.21444.11.camel@beez.lab.cmartin.tk> <1331203321.21444.13.camel@beez.lab.cmartin.tk> <4F58C977.8000400@xiplink.com> <20120309033826.GA6164@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vsjhi9wku.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jeff King , Dmitry Potapov , Marc Branchaud , Carlos =?utf-8?Q?Mart=C3=ADn?= Nieto , Jeremy Morton , Thomas Rast , git@vger.kernel.org To: Matthieu Moy X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Mar 09 10:57:37 2012 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 1S5wZp-0002ib-6D for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Mar 2012 10:57:33 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753409Ab2CIJ52 (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Mar 2012 04:57:28 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:42541 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751945Ab2CIJ51 (ORCPT ); Fri, 9 Mar 2012 04:57:27 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 02E8F5326; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 04:57:27 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; s=sasl; bh=QOOOBqXgbwUc0A3KjZT0V30JWVQ=; b=vHUlk4wcAhR6uVyhGRbB tkd+7DTFzjzYhgEECfvnKN9Tr6pa00k0qGn7U87XtDHf9sllgL5fMYQzZ3sVV7SB MPGK97GNSw4OYxHyce7gWcvrwnvpV90GsGuEG1cMZXAXD9G9vw0z2iNeH/ovjUvq QmSs2JPLK9GNO/j7EKocipk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=HAkCB88nSqAxtUqW0toTwL2RuWfxyg7qVXRsLwsyLOPytX ZIGiDgnCs7WjpPZIPjEIRn3b60zgDQbcBMkvJD30XN/4Iw2VZiUGNb1k2r4AYmu0 QFwKahPR9l54gB9pxsxtBrxlLD5ivbk8Ejo7SRDMJK1NkdFqmTCGwOBnaXUHI= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ED1BA5325; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 04:57:26 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [76.102.170.102]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 50C985324; Fri, 9 Mar 2012 04:57:26 -0500 (EST) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 466F4A1C-69CE-11E1-ABA1-9DB42E706CDE-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Matthieu Moy writes: > Junio C Hamano writes: > >> I just dug it up; start from here: >> >> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/123350/focus=123541 > > That's an old discussion. A more recent one is here: > > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/166743 > > (interleaved with a discussion about tag namespace, but the end of the > message is about push.default) I'd say that it only shows that everybody for some strange reason forgot to learn from history, including me, in that more recent thread. Luckily, Jeff noticed eerily familiarity this time around. > (i.e. "Care to roll an appliable patch?", which I guess everyone has > been too lazy to do) I doubt that it would have solved any issue we suffered in the 1.6.3 to 1.6.4 timeframe if somebody gave a concluding patch after that message in the more recent discussion. Specifically, it would not have solved anything that these raised: http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/118866/focus=119142 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/118866/focus=119148 Resurrecting the old patch that was reverted is the easiest part. It is much more important to spread the word to the people who will be hurt by the default change well before it actually happens, and to get them engaged in the discussion, along with those who would benefit from such a change. That needs to happen before any patch that reverts a revert. Even in the kernel community, I suspect that most people do not follow this mailing list anymore and simply trust that we won't make changes that affect them negatively. People will complain only after a change hits them, and tell us "We didn't know that you will be making this stupid change." And having this thread here does not count as "spreading the word". I can send a message saying "There is a proposal to change the default behaviour of 'git push' on the Git mailing list, and you may be negatively affected if you do not see anything in the output from 'git config push.default' when such a change happens. On the other hand, you may want to see the default behaviour to change. In either case, please join the discussion to give us more data point and help us decide the future of Git." to the kernel list. Anybody could, for that matter. One thing I refuse to do is to fight this battle alone for "let's change the default" folks, especially when I am not convinced that it is a good change to begin with. It is "let's change the default" folks' responsibility to help the legwork.