Subject: Re: [RFC] [PATCH] remote: add new --fetch option for set-url

From: Jeff King <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2014 17:22:44 -0500

On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 11:16:03PM +0100, Peter Wu wrote:

> > A new option "--fetch" introducing a different behaviour is
> > perfectly fine; existing users who are not using it will not be
> > harmed by sudden behaviour change.
> 
> As stated before, I took care to avoid backwards incompatibilities. The
> command will still work as expected by the users who are aware of this
> particular behavior.

Right. My original complaint was only that "--fetch" is not as
orthogonal to "--push" (and an optionless set-url) as it could be. I
think the alternatives for going forward are basically:

  1. Name it something besides --fetch (but that's rather clunky).

  2. Migrate to new behavior, which is what is being discussed here.
     Probably needs a transition period?

  3. Live with it. Probably address the weirdness in the documentation.

  4. Do nothing, drop the patch.

I think I'd be OK with (3), with an appropriate documentation update.

-Peff