From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Matthieu Moy Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] push: start warning upcoming default change for push.default Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:05:04 +0100 Message-ID: References: <1331281886-11667-1-git-send-email-Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr> <1331288715.21444.38.camel@beez.lab.cmartin.tk> <4F5A4C45.7070406@xiplink.com> <4F5AF1A8.4050604@alum.mit.edu> <4F5E12A5.6030701@xiplink.com> <20120312183725.GA2187@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: Jeff King , Marc Branchaud , Michael Haggerty , Carlos =?iso-8859-1?Q?Mart=EDn?= Nieto , git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com To: Dmitry Potapov X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Mar 15 09:05:34 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 1S85gh-00059l-Vb for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:05:32 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1759202Ab2COIF2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Mar 2012 04:05:28 -0400 Received: from mx2.imag.fr ([129.88.30.17]:60608 "EHLO rominette.imag.fr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756213Ab2COIFV (ORCPT ); Thu, 15 Mar 2012 04:05:21 -0400 Received: from mail-veri.imag.fr (mail-veri.imag.fr [129.88.43.52]) by rominette.imag.fr (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2F80v2s014854 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:00:57 +0100 Received: from bauges.imag.fr ([129.88.7.32]) by mail-veri.imag.fr with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1S85gH-0008ID-Dl; Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:05:05 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Dmitry Potapov's message of "Wed, 14 Mar 2012 20:47:23 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.93 (gnu/linux) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.2 (rominette.imag.fr [129.88.30.17]); Thu, 15 Mar 2012 09:00:58 +0100 (CET) X-IMAG-MailScanner-Information: Please contact MI2S MIM for more information X-MailScanner-ID: q2F80v2s014854 X-IMAG-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-IMAG-MailScanner-SpamCheck: X-IMAG-MailScanner-From: matthieu.moy@grenoble-inp.fr MailScanner-NULL-Check: 1332403262.82342@dxA72JNTcXfVHdFlmp8hqw Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Dmitry Potapov writes: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 6:47 PM, Matthieu Moy > wrote: >> Dmitry Potapov writes: >> >>> Not of course. I said above non-fast forward push should not be used by >>> beginners. >> >> Do you mean "beginners should not force non-fast forward push", or >> "beginners should not use flow where push may be denied because of >> non-fast forward"? > > Of course, the former. I have never said that the centralized workflow > should never been used. I have only said that it is not scalable and > lead to problems in larger projects. Then I don't follow you. The starting point of the discussion was my rule of thumb about push/pull: | There's a rule of thumb which works very well for beginners: when "git | push" tells you to pull before, then pull before. This rule of thumb | works, but only provided "push" and "pull" are symmetrical. I can rephrase the end as "... provided 'push' pushes to the same branch 'pull' pulls from" (i.e. provided push.default=upstream). Can you explain what you disagree with here? Or do you actually agree with it? Then, I showed the message of "git push" in the non-fast forward case, which suggests that the user should pull, and you said: | I agree that the current diagnostic is not suitable for beginners. Again, what do you mean? What diagnosis would you suggest, if not pulling? >> either shared for one user and multiple machines, or shared >> between developers? > > I am not sure that I understood this part. I mean that a repository can be shared because multiple developers have acces to it, or because the same developer has several clones. >> If you mean that shared repositories are too complex for beginners, my >> experience is exactly the opposite. > > It is not too complex but it is wrong for any more or less serious > project. I never argued against distributed development. I'm saying that centralized development also makes sense, especially with beginners. -- Matthieu Moy http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/