Re: push.default: current vs upstream

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

Matthieu Moy [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Junio C Hamano [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Obviously the
former is much simpler to explain and understand, as people do not have to
learn upstream tracking before doing their first "push".

Again, this is simple only for people who never run "git pull" without
argument.

If you are running "git pull" with what to pull and integrate, you know
system much better than those who only use the canned "git pull without
argument" settings, so customizing push.default should be easier for you
than the real beginners whom we try to avoid confusing with the built-in
default, no?

I don't understand what you mean, sorry.

I'll rephrase my point in case it wasn't clear. My claim is that a
beginner who want to run argumentless "git pull" has to understand where
his changes come from. So, he already has to understand what "upstream
branch" means to Git.

I agree that explaining "push.default=current" is easy alone, but once
you've taught "git pull", explaining that "git push" does something else
and why doesn't seem that easy to me. OTOH, once you understand "git
pull", explaining "push.default=upstream" should be as simple as "send
your changes where git pull would get them".

Before saying "again", perhaps we should read and think about what the
other side said.  I think [*1*] raises a good point.

*1* http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/194175/focus=194470

I think this message precisely supports my claim: we focus the
discussion on "git push", without thinking on the big picture "git pull"
AND "git push". The message you point to does not talk at all about "git
pull".

-- 
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/