Possible change to the "git push" behavior

Augie Fackler lists at durin42.com
Tue Mar 20 11:44:45 CDT 2012


On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Martin Geisler <mg at aragost.com> wrote:
> Angel Ezquerra <angel.ezquerra at gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 2:28 PM, Martin Geisler <mg at aragost.com> wrote:
>>> Greg Ward <greg at gerg.ca> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 20 March 2012, Angel Ezquerra Moreu said:
>>>>> It seems that the Git project is considering changing the default
>>>>> behavior for the "git push" command (http://lwn.net/Articles/487131).
>>>>>
>>>>> Since mercurial bookmarks are meant (AFAIK) to behave similarly to git
>>>>> branches, would mercurial change the way bookmarks work if git changes
>>>>> the way git branches work? How would that work given mercurial's
>>>>> backwards compatibility policy?
>>>>
>>>> I don't speak for Matt or for anyone else, but I suspect the answer is
>>>> "not bloody likely". "hg update" does not behave the same way as "cvs
>>>> update" does, so why should "hg push" behave the same way as "git
>>>> push"? Mercurial is its own project with its own aims and its own
>>>> policies.
>>>>
>>>> That said, the "push all changesets by default" policy could be a
>>>> minor annoyance when using bookmarks.
>>>
>>> I know this is about bookmarks, but as a related data point, I can
>>> mention that Henrik and Sune's repoman wrapper always operates with a -b
>>> flag in order to push/pull the right named branch instead of operating
>>> on all of them.
>>>
>>> Last time I spoke with them about it, they said that it would be
>>> impossible (very impractical) for them to push/pull everything by
>>> default.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Martin Geisler
>>
>> Yes, I was referring to the way bookmarks are pushed specifically. I
>> am not suggesting that mercurial's push should be the same as git's
>> push. I just wonder whether the idea is for mercurial's bookmarks to
>> closely follow git's branch behavior. If that is the case and git
>> changes the way it pushes branches, what will mercurial do?
>
> Mercurial's bookmarks were inspired by Git branches in the sense that
> they're pointers to changesets that move on commit. But it's not a goal
> to replicate Git branches 100% and users should not expect changes in
> Git to propagate directly to Mercurial bookmarks.

I'm actually stunned they're even considering changing this behavior.

>
> --
> Martin Geisler
>
> aragost Trifork
> Professional Mercurial support
> http://www.aragost.com/mercurial/
> _______________________________________________
> Mercurial-devel mailing list
> Mercurial-devel at selenic.com
> http://selenic.com/mailman/listinfo/mercurial-devel


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list