From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.7 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A35E1F453 for ; Mon, 29 Oct 2018 04:21:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729349AbeJ2NE5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Oct 2018 09:04:57 -0400 Received: from mail-wm1-f47.google.com ([209.85.128.47]:34006 "EHLO mail-wm1-f47.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729256AbeJ2NE5 (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Oct 2018 09:04:57 -0400 Received: by mail-wm1-f47.google.com with SMTP id f1-v6so8580660wmg.1 for ; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 21:18:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=V0wXScWVui2A2Kr7Rj7c5ICcdZNo5QAE7IZw428awak=; b=gKgqQyFIPh7oC/DWdVltgUtl1lXCzX8VSTPEsJFAn8Teup3RQJbTm7TQLNmbZu96b+ 4FGjl/EQfhtRLwGH8Xp+2sryOVLVKcyQtospMkbGczH6KmTvtk3jWG0BmiA4DZITCiQF 8NV5U8GdVFdQLcMLv2MgvEXqrv2AbtGVjNNcF5W569r822iikjkWrrsR8g3kTWESC/fj jbQQ+vvE9u9Gj1RB4qFi3+D7QC2mlGNmM+7F9gfVxamFzAzY01me+p39pPmmcLbS9igY v5E1OuttCTWWG7rNtYR97Ag4AK0d5pArukH+iI5nJR5dK9UaDnluy0JMluvwpLBZvuh1 5Aew== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=V0wXScWVui2A2Kr7Rj7c5ICcdZNo5QAE7IZw428awak=; b=mrZ3upkAwMp/XpV02B/Nq06VVANFgYCtg6RdMkncE4sSrQblf9CcGl0FsYYKBuphhf 0/pXMcQ3F9JDh5ZpMLyBEyMA1PBgBgPUfWNSv9joGs76pZUEke7ZkVUr1iDfgzZoGVGC kxOQNDkPKw8plPgZ+B/NKv9SMRblb5ojxKStLmH7ddcr6Jjac/jZhcQKT2bImgEZBJoY m4I0ZcZbIkKvdUAseLvRgpj+I5drY74fhWvQebIv12FMBbeI468prMssOsQdxtj5QoBQ zGPTcVBLJ0SodRfA/RxyZTZuOakHqmlfZb+aCgKY6iWbLb+gMd9kbxnuHJ6xmqHv5GD4 a6AA== X-Gm-Message-State: AGRZ1gJOYcmV8g6Ns5S8gxzbwQyGZ3mVJiPnFXwztsgPC3q4IUTwI4wU s4UtCXWh+J/w7c/YooHC2n8= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AJdET5efSiPs8jdL7FBdmXvrMbayf4PSpqp/f2iG/JgpP+vtxEPuU2P4XjpfkBZi1F3Wi3QiGXW2+w== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:8e8c:: with SMTP id q134-v6mr12351893wmd.112.1540786679120; Sun, 28 Oct 2018 21:17:59 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (112.68.155.104.bc.googleusercontent.com. [104.155.68.112]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 138-v6sm4308070wmr.16.2018.10.28.21.17.57 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Sun, 28 Oct 2018 21:17:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Junio C Hamano To: =?utf-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsA==?= Bjarmason Cc: Jeff King , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] push: add an advice on unqualified push References: <20181010104145.25610-1-avarab@gmail.com> <20181010104145.25610-3-avarab@gmail.com> <20181010205505.GB12949@sigill.intra.peff.net> <87r2gxebsi.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> <87r2gclnjc.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com> Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2018 13:17:57 +0900 In-Reply-To: (Junio C. Hamano's message of "Mon, 29 Oct 2018 10:00:54 +0900") Message-ID: User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Junio C Hamano writes: > To put it another way, I would think both of these two have at most > the same probability that the push wants to go to a local branch: > > git push refs/remotes/foo:foo > git push :foo > > and I would further say that the former is less likely than the > latter that it wants to create a local branch, because it is more > plausible that it wants to create a similar remote-tracking branch > there. This needs clarification. I do not mean "it is more plausible that it wants remote-tracking rather than local". What I meant was that between the two cases, pushing refs/remotes/foo:foo is more likely a sign that the user wants to create a local branch than pushing other random sha1 expression, like 40eaf9377fe649:foo, is.