Thread (33 messages) flat view 33 messages, 4 authors, 2016-06-15

Re: [ITCH] Specify refspec without remote

From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <hidden>
Date: 2016-06-15 22:56:46

Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
Jeff King wrote:
quoted
If we are not going to break the existing behavior, I think it can be
argued that consistency and simplicity of the rules is important, so the
user can predict what will happen. But the more we discuss, the more I
think we should simply change the current behavior (to stop respecting
branch.* config with "matching"), which just seems wrong to me. Then we
can be simple and consistent, and do what the user probably intended.
So there are some push.default options that respect branch.* config
(ie. "current"), and others that don't (ie. "matching").  I would
argue that push.default is badly designed to begin with, so the
solution makes sense to me even if the patch is a bit of hack; we
never guaranteed that the various push.default options respect the
same configuration variables.
If we're going to break "matching" anyway, let's break it fully.  I
propose that we make it respect each individual branch's
branch.<name>.pushremote/ branch.<name>.remote and push the branch to
that remote.  That'll let us design a git push -- master
implicit-push; that actually makes sense.
Keyboard shortcuts
hback out one level
jnext message in thread
kprevious message in thread
ldrill in
Escclose help / fold thread tree
?toggle this help