Git v2.0.0 is a backward-incompatible release, which means you should expect differences since the v1.x series.

Unless you’ve been following closely the Git mailing list, you probably don’t know the history behind the v2.0 release, which started long time ago (more than three years). It all started with a mail from Junio C Hamano, asking for developers to submit ideas for changes that normally would not happen because they break backwards compatibility, he invited us to think as if “we were writing Git from scratch”. This big release that would break backwards compatibility was going to be named “1.8.0” and people started to submit ideas for this important release. Eventually too much time passed, the versioning scheme changed, v1.8.0 was released, and the changes proposed for v1.8. slipped into what is now v2.0.

Parts of v2.0 have been already been deployed one way or the other (for example if you have configured ‘push.default = simple’), but finally today we have v2.0 final. And here are the big changes that we got.

‘git push’ default has changed

Here’s what the release notes say:

When "git push [$there]" does not say what to push, we have used the traditional "matching" semantics so far (all your branches were sent to the remote as long as there already are branches of the same name over there). In Git 2.0, the default is now the "simple" semantics, which pushes: - only the current branch to the branch with the same name, and only when the current branch is set to integrate with that remote branch, if you are pushing to the same remote as you fetch from; or - only the current branch to the branch with the same name, if you are pushing to a remote that is not where you usually fetch from. You can use the configuration variable "push.default" to change this. If you are an old-timer who wants to keep using the "matching" semantics, you can set the variable to "matching", for example. Read the documentation for other possibilities.

Is that clear? Given the bad track record of Git documentation it wouldn’t surprise me if you didn’t get what this chunk of text is trying to say at all. Personally I find it much easier to read the code to figure out what is happening.

So let me try to explain. When you type ‘git push’ (without any arguments), Git uses the configuration ‘push.default’ in order to find out what to push. Before ‘push.default’ defaulted to ‘matching’, and now it defaults to ‘simple’.

The ‘matching’ configuration essentially converts ‘ git push ‘ into ‘ git push origin : ‘, which means push all the matching branches, so if you have a local ‘master’, and there’s a remote ‘master’, ‘master’ is pushed; if you have a local and remote ‘fix-1’, ‘fix-1’ is pushed, if you have a local ‘ext-feature-1’, but there’s no matching remote branch, it’s not pushed, and so on.

The ‘simple’ configuration pushes a single branch instead, and it uses your configured upstream branch (see this post for a full explanation of the upstream branch), so if your current branch is ‘master’, and if ‘origin/master’ is the upstream of your ‘master’ branch, ‘git push’ will basically be the same as ‘ git push origin master ‘, or to be more specific ‘ git push origin master:master ‘ (the upstream branch can have a different name).

Note: If you are not familiar with the src:dst syntax; you can push a local branch ‘src’ and have the ‘dst’ name on the server, so you don’t need to rename a local branch, you can do ‘git push origin foobar:feature-a’, and your local branch “foobar” will be named “feature-a” on the server. This has nothing to do with v2.0.

However, if the current branch is ‘fix-1’ and the upstream is ‘origin/master’, ‘git push’ will complain that the name of the destination branch is not the same, because it doesn’t know if to do ‘ git push origin fix-1:master ‘ or ‘ git push origin fix-1:fix-1 ‘.

Additionally if you do ‘ git push github ‘ (not the remote of your upstream branch), Git will simply use the name of the current branch, essentially ‘ git push github fix-1 ‘ (‘fix-1’ being the name of the current branch).

This mode is anything but simple to describe. But perhaps the name is OK, because you can expect it to “simply work”.

Would I care?

If you don’t type ‘git push’, but instead specify what and where to push… you don’t care.

If you have configured ‘push.default’ already, which most likely you already did, because otherwise you will be getting the following annoying message all the time since two years ago… you don’t care.

warning: push.default is unset; its implicit value is changing in Git 2.0 from 'matching' to 'simple'. To squelch this message and maintain the current behavior after the default changes, use: git config --global push.default matching To squelch this message and adopt the new behavior now, use: git config --global push.default simple When push.default is set to 'matching', git will push local branches to the remote branches that already exist with the same name. In Git 2.0, Git will default to the more conservative 'simple' behavior, which only pushes the current branch to the corresponding remote branch that 'git pull' uses to update the current branch. See 'git help config' and search for 'push.default' for further information. (the 'simple' mode was introduced in Git 1.7.11. Use the similar mode 'current' instead of 'simple' if you sometimes use older versions of Git)

So, most likely you don’t care.

‘git add’ in directory

Here’s what the release notes say:

When "git add -u" and "git add -A" are run inside a subdirectory without specifying which paths to add on the command line, they operate on the entire tree for consistency with "git commit -a" and other commands (these commands used to operate only on the current subdirectory). Say "git add -u ." or "git add -A ." if you want to limit the operation to the current directory.

Although this is a clearer explanation, it’s not very clear what is changing, so let me give you can example.

Say you have modified two files, ‘README’ and ‘test/basic.t’, then you go to the ‘test’ directory, and run ‘ git add -u ‘, in pre-v2.0 only ‘test/basic.t’ will be staged, in post-v2.0 both files will be staged. If you run the command in the top level directory, nothing changes.

Would I care?

If you haven’t seen the following warning while doing ‘ git add -u ‘ or ‘ git add -A ‘, or if you don’t even use those options, you are fine.

warning: The behavior of 'git add --update (or -u)' with no path argument from a subdirectory of the tree will change in Git 2.0 and should not be used anymore. To add content for the whole tree, run: git add --update :/ (or git add -u :/) To restrict the command to the current directory, run: git add --update . (or git add -u .) With the current Git version, the command is restricted to the current directory.

‘git add’ adds removals

Here’s what the release notes say:

"git add " is the same as "git add -A " now, so that "git add dir/" will notice paths you removed from the directory and record the removal. In older versions of Git, "git add " used to ignore removals. You can say "git add --ignore-removal " to add only added or modified paths in , if you really want to.

Again, it should be clearer with an example. Say you removed the file ‘test/basic.t’ and added a new file ‘test/main.t’, those changes are not staged, so you stage them with ‘git add test/’, pre-v2.0 ‘test/basic.t’ would remain tracked, post-v2.0, ‘test/basic.t’ is removed from the stage.

Would I care?

If you haven’t seen the following warning while doing ‘ git add ‘, you are fine.

warning: You ran 'git add' with neither '-A (--all)' or '--ignore-removal', whose behaviour will change in Git 2.0 with respect to paths you removed. Paths like 'test/basic.t' that are removed from your working tree are ignored with this version of Git. * 'git add --ignore-removal ', which is the current default, ignores paths you removed from your working tree. * 'git add --all ' will let you also record the removals. Run 'git status' to check the paths you removed from your working tree.

The rest

The "-q" option to "git diff-files", which does *NOT* mean "quiet", has been removed (it told Git to ignore deletion, which you can do with "git diff-files --diff-filter=d").

Most people don’t use this command, thus don’t care.

"git request-pull" lost a few "heuristics" that often led to mistakes.

Again, most people don’t use this command, which is mostly broken anyway.

The default prefix for "git svn" has changed in Git 2.0. For a long time, "git svn" created its remote-tracking branches directly under refs/remotes, but it now places them under refs/remotes/origin/ unless it is told otherwise with its "--prefix" option.

If you don’t use ‘git svn’, you don’t care. If you don’t see a difference between ‘trunk’ and ‘origin/trunk’, you don’t care.

tl;dr

You probably don’t care about these backward-incompatible changes. Sure, Git v2.0.0 received a good dosage of new features and bug-fixes, but so did v1.9.0, and all the versions before.

Given the fact that Git v2.0.0 has been cooking for three years, I think it’s a big missed opportunity that nothing really changed, specially given that in previous user surveys people have said the user-interface and documentation needs to improve, and there have been patches to try to do so. In a separate post I discuss what I think Git v2.0.0 should have included.