# Re: \[PATCH v2 1/2 / RFC\] builtin/branch: stop supporting the use of --set-upstream option

- From: Kaartic Sivaraam \<hidden\>
- Date: 2017-08-14 08:49:22 
- List: git
- Page: https://ratatoskr.run/git/2017/08/7731906
- Thread: https://ratatoskr.run/git/2017/08/7731083/t.md

```text
On Wednesday 09 August 2017 12:03 AM, Martin Ågren wrote:
> (Also, is this really a refactoring?)

Not quite.

>>   --set-upstream::
>> -       If specified branch does not exist yet or if `--force` has been
>> -       given, acts exactly like `--track`. Otherwise sets up configuration
>> -       like `--track` would when creating the branch, except that where
>> -       branch points to is not changed.
>> +       This option is no longer supported and will be removed in the future.
>> +       Consider using --track or --set-upstream-to instead.
>> ++
>> +Note: This could possibly become an alias of --set-upstream-to in the future.
> Maybe the final note could be removed? Someone who is looking up
> --set-upstream because Git just "crashed" on them will only want to know
> what they should do instead. Our thoughts about the future are perhaps
> not that interesting.
I thought it's better to document it to avoid people from getting surprised
when the options *starts working* again.

> (I sort of wonder if this option needs to be
> documented at all, especially if this doesn't say anything more than
> the die() just did.)
Yeah, it needs improvement.

> Also, I'm wondering if it should be "has been removed" instead of "will
> be removed"? /Implementation-wise/, it has not been removed yet, but to
> the user, it has. So maybe just "This option has been removed. Consider
> using --track or --set-upstream-to instead." The same below.
I guess you're right. I thought "no longer supported" was equally
communicative.

```