Re: git push [rejected] question

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Feb 19, 2008, 15:25 UTC
Message-ID: <20080219152549.GC24499@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <76718490802190718t5e70abb2x8f96fc7154576594@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Feb 19, 2008 at 10:18:09AM -0500, Jay Soffian wrote:

> I'd like to nominate you to rewrite all of the git documentation from
> scratch. :-) Your explanations are extremely clear.

Doh! This is why nobody writes clear explanations: it gets you nominated for more work. ;)

Show 8 quoted lines

> > > It seems like the default should be to push just the current branch
> > > ... this would correspond to what a user of git pull expects (even
> > > though the converse of git-push is really git-fetch, for a new user,
> > > that might not be entirely clear).
> >
> > I agree with you, but others do not
> 
> Sounds like an opportunity for a config option.

Again I agree, though I think there is some resistance to that (see the thread I mentioned). Junio's opinion seems to be "why can't they just use 'git push <remote> HEAD'?" (and he suggested a 'git push HEAD' shorthand syntax, as well).

But then, nobody has put forth a patch, so I think if you wanted to argue it, the best way would be to do so (though I think it would be rejected, it would give those who wanted to try it something to play with).

-Peff