Hello guys!
We are working pretty much with branches here and I think it would be
pretty cool, to make git-push recognize some configuratio in
~/.git/config that describes where to push what:
git-push origin master:<name of worker> is what we currenty do
manually
Nice would be
[branch "master"]
remote-push = origin
remote-push-merge = another_branch
And thus perhaps also changing the existing specs:
remote = ... to remote-fetch = ...
merge = ... to remote-fetch-merge =
And perhaps it would also make sense to replace "refs/heads/master" with
only "master"?
What do you think about those three ideas?
Nico
--
Think about Free and Open Source Software (FOSS).
http://nico.schottelius.org/documentations/foss/the-term-foss/
PGP: BFE4 C736 ABE5 406F 8F42 F7CF B8BE F92A 9885 188C
On Nov 21, 2007, at 11:55 AM, Nico -telmich- Schottelius wrote:
Hello guys!
We are working pretty much with branches here and I think it would be
pretty cool, to make git-push recognize some configuratio in
~/.git/config that describes where to push what:
git-push origin master:<name of worker> is what we currenty do
manually
Nice would be
[branch "master"]
remote-push = origin
remote-push-merge = another_branch
This was discussed in a similar form here:
http://marc.info/?l=git&m=119384331712996&w=2
http://marc.info/?l=git&m=119400354601328&w=2
So, yes, I think it would be very useful. I did not yet find
time to implement it.
And thus perhaps also changing the existing specs:
remote = ... to remote-fetch = ...
merge = ... to remote-fetch-merge =
This is a logical consequence. It gives more freedom to pull
from one repo and push to another one.
I'm not fully convinced, though, of the configuration names
you propose. However, I have no better suggestion right away.
And perhaps it would also make sense to replace "refs/heads/master"
with
only "master"?
No. We use full refnames everywhere. I think we should stick
with them.
Steffen