Re: [RFC/PATCH] Introduce branch.<name>.pushremote

Junio C Hamano wrote:

Ramkumar Ramachandra [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

diff --git a/remote.c b/remote.c
index e53a6eb..d6fcfc0 100644
--- a/remote.c
+++ b/remote.c

@@ -48,6 +48,7 @@ static int branches_nr;

 static struct branch *current_branch;
 static const char *default_remote_name;
+static const char *pushremote_name;
 static int explicit_default_remote_name;

 static struct rewrites rewrites;

@@ -363,6 +364,12 @@ static int handle_config(const char *key, const char *value, void *cb)
                              default_remote_name = branch->remote_name;
                              explicit_default_remote_name = 1;
                      }
+             } else if (!strcmp(subkey, ".pushremote")) {
+                     if (!value)
+                             return config_error_nonbool(key);
+                     branch->pushremote_name = xstrdup(value);

Perhaps use git_config_string()?

I was just following the style of the surrounding code without
thinking.  However, it looks like the surrounding code may be dated,
so I'll include a patch to update it to use git_config_string() before
making the change here.

quoted

+                     if (branch == current_branch)
+                             pushremote_name = branch->pushremote_name;

Why is this global only when current_branch is involved?

In other words, does it make sense to read branch.$name.pushremote
for all the other irrelevant branches?

In yet other words, perhaps adding pushremote_name to the branch
structure is unneeded, and you only need this single global
variable?

Frankly, I'm unhappy with this global.  Setting a global here and
subsequently reading it in pushremote_get() feels flaky.  Why use it
at all when we have branch->remote_name, branch->remote, and (the now
introduced) branch->pushremote_name?  I left the pushremote_name field
around, with the expectation that other codepaths that use the
remote_name field might be able to use it.

Thanks.