demerphq [off-list ref] writes:
And actually I find your use of "git pull" and "pull" in the
expression "pull from a branch other than one with the same name"
confusing. Barring misconfiguration pull operates on only one local
branch and it is usually the one with the same name. However push
operates on multiple local branches.
It does with push.default = matching, but with either options we are
discussing here, argumentless "git push" would push only one branch.
The choice we have is whether to push to the branch with the same name,
or to the branch from which "git pull" would take the changes.
(I realize that in this discussion, "current" may be misleading. I mean
"push.default=current", not "the behavior we have currently")
Lastly I have never really encountered any confusion with explaining
the default behaviour of git-fetch, nor actually git-pull, but I have
encountered lots of confusion of people using git-push. They expect
git-push to be the opposite of git-pull not git-fetch.
I do also expect "git pull" to be symmetrical to "git pull", and
"push.default=upstream" is the closest to symmetry.
--
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/
On 2 April 2012 23:16, Matthieu Moy [off-list ref] wrote:
demerphq [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
And actually I find your use of "git pull" and "pull" in the
expression "pull from a branch other than one with the same name"
confusing. Barring misconfiguration pull operates on only one local
branch and it is usually the one with the same name. However push
operates on multiple local branches.
It does with push.default = matching, but with either options we are
discussing here, argumentless "git push" would push only one branch.
The choice we have is whether to push to the branch with the same name,
or to the branch from which "git pull" would take the changes.
Ah, then I misunderstood your point. Probably because of the point you
make next.
(I realize that in this discussion, "current" may be misleading. I mean
"push.default=current", not "the behavior we have currently")
quoted
Lastly I have never really encountered any confusion with explaining
the default behaviour of git-fetch, nor actually git-pull, but I have
encountered lots of confusion of people using git-push. They expect
git-push to be the opposite of git-pull not git-fetch.
I do also expect "git pull" to be symmetrical to "git pull", and
"push.default=upstream" is the closest to symmetry.
After clarifying what he meant off-list I'd just like to say that I
agree with Matthieu. Picking a default that makes git-push not be the
opposite of git-pull will end up surprising some people some of the
time. Enough that I suspect that this conversation will be coming up
again in the future.
cheers,
Yves
--
perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"