Stallman wants Git commit and push to be a single operation
thread.gmane.org
thread.gmane.org
After much "wow, that would be awful" convincing by people who are more familiar with git and could articulate why one commits privately on purpose, RMS later changes his stance. What I saw him eventually say was that commit should remind the user that they may need to push to publish (and emacs should add a vc-push command), which is quite reasonable.
To be fair, this is the issue with trying to put a generic interface over systems that don't -quite- work the same way. You tend to favor lowest common denominator. And sometimes there's not a "least surprise" workflow for everybody.
The wind of the conversation now seems to blow towards one workflow for vcs and one slightly augmented one for dvcs, which seems correct.
I never thought I would compare RMS to the clueless manager stereotype, but this 'I don't understand it so it's obviously a problem' attitude is just… ignorant.
There's an inherent complexity with concurrency that a centralised, linearised VCS does not exhibit.
In the end, it sounds like Stallman needed to read any basic 'how to git' document on any blog anywhere and it would have explained to him what he needed to know to not lose his data, and maybe 'why to git' to figure out the benefits of 'commit' vs. 'atomic commit and push'.
(and I care about what RMS thinks)