Possible change to the "git push" behavior

[Na'Tosha Bard]

2012/3/20 Augie Fackler <lists at durin42.com>

> 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.
>

Really?  "Push only the branch I'm working on" is the behavior most users
expect, in my experience, and pushing everything at once by default is
actually an inconvenience.

Cheers,
Na'Tosha

-- 
*Na'Tosha Bard*
Build & Infrastructure Developer | Unity Technologies - Copenhagen

*E-Mail:* natosha at unity3d.com
*Skype:* natosha.bard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://selenic.com/pipermail/mercurial-devel/attachments/20120320/a989a459/attachment.html>