Re: push.default: current vs upstream

Matthieu Moy [off-list ref] writes:

Jeff King [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Then the rule is not really "act only if upstream and current would do
the same thing".

Right. That would be closer to "fail with explicit error when where to
push is not clear enough".

I think that is a good explanation.

quoted

On the one hand, I think what you are suggesting is reasonable in most
cases. On the other hand, what if the lack of upstream is because the
user failed to configure it properly? Then it could be surprising.

I don't have a strong opinion either way.

No strong opinion either, but I wanted to raise the point to make sure
we agree.

With your patch, "git push" fails with

  fatal: The current branch branch-name has no upstream branch.
  To push the current branch and set the remote as upstream, use
  
      git push --set-upstream origin branch-name

so it's not really bad: the suggestion guides the user to a situation
where the next "git push" will succeed unambiguously. As a side effect,
the next "git pull" will fetch from the same branch, which is probably
what the user wants if he hasn't explicitely configured an upstream
branch yet.

Sounds sensible.