On ven., 2017-03-24 at 12:29 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Jeff King <p...@peff.net> writes: > > > My one question would be whether people would want this to actually be > > specific to a particular remote, and not just on for a given repository > > (your "site-specific" in the description made me think of that). In that > > case it would be better as part of the remote.* config. > > Yeah, I had the same reaction. > > Conceptually, this sits next to remote.*.push that defines which set > of refs are sent by default, and remote.<name>.pushAtomic does make > sense. If (and only if) it turns out to be cumbersome for somebody > to set the configuration for each and every remote, it is OK to also > add push.atomic to serve as a fallback for remote.*.pushAtomic, I > would think, but adding only push.atomic feels somewhat backwards.
Thanks for your feedback I'm mostly using single remotes that's why I didn't even think of making it configurable per remote. But you're right that makes more sense. I'll try to make that modification to the patch. As for my use case: I'd like to use default atomic pushes when pushing a new tag among our stable branch, but inevitably forgetting to rebase beforehand. Therefore pushing a "dangling" commit/tag -- Romuald Brunet
