Closed endorama closed 5 years ago
Could you outline why push wouldn't be part of your normal flow after you have tracked a file and then committed the changes while in the repo?
The primary use comes from "experimental" or to be tested additions: I generally commit them to the local repository, in order to keep track of them. Then they lie there for some time, and if I'm satisfied I push them to the remote.
Basically I split the "adding this to a castle" and "sharing with others" steps.
My only concern is that this would open up for other subcommands like git commit and git add, which would just end up making homeshick a proxy for the git command.
I unserstand the concern, but if you look at homeshick cd
or homeshick track
those are already "proxy", just very very handy in daily operations :)
I would say that proxying git
is not a homeshick
responsability, but having handy tool for managing underline repository is.
Also, we need tests for this, without them any changes that could break this subcommand will go undiscovered.
I just wanted to share the code to get feedback, if you are ok accepting it I'll work on tests. I'm not so fond on bats
, but I'll try my best.
Hello, I've been using
homeshick
for quite a lot now, and the most common things that happens is that I forgot to push changes (thus trying toupdated
terminates with lots ofahead
).So I found useful a
push
command, that in pair withpull
pushes to all remote castles.Hoping this can be useful to others, here comes the PR.
Thanks a lot for this project!