Possible change to the "git push" behavior

Augie Fackler lists at durin42.com
Tue Mar 20 16:51:23 UTC 2012


On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Na'Tosha Bard <natosha at unity3d.com> wrote:
> 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.

Think of all the deployed software out there that depends on the
existing behavior. This has been the way git has worked for 4+ years,
it's going to be pretty entrenched.

>
> Cheers,
> Na'Tosha
>
> --
> Na'Tosha Bard
> Build & Infrastructure Developer | Unity Technologies - Copenhagen
>
> E-Mail: natosha at unity3d.com
> Skype: natosha.bard
>


More information about the Mercurial-devel mailing list