Re: [PATCH] git push --track

From: Rudolf Polzer <divverent@alientrap.org>
Date: Jan 15, 2010, 13:44 UTC
Message-ID: <20100115134425.GA30986@rm.endoftheinternet.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100115072741.6117@nanako3.lavabit.com>

On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 07:27:41AM +0900, Nanako Shiraishi wrote:

Show 15 quoted lines

> 'git push --track' was suggested as a way to let users delay that decision.
> 
> 'git branch --configure' to update the same information for an existing
> branch was suggested as an alternative UI. An added benefit is that this
> approach will allow the same option to be used when creating a branch.
> 
> 'git pull --remember' that remembers the options used from the command line
> was suggested as a solution in addition to 'git branch --reconfigure'. Users
> can postpone the decision even more than 'git push --track', and it naturally
> supports setting branch.topic.rebase with 'git pull --rebase --remember'.  It
> also has two additional benefits. 'push --track' configures what happens when
> you 'pull' (counter-intuitive), but 'pull --remember' makes 'pull' to change
> the setting used by 'pull' (much more natural). Also it does not add the
> confusing word 'track' to the interface (for a more detailed discussion on
> 'track', see http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/136785).

Still requires you to specify the remote and the branch name twice.

So the workflow would be:

git push origin localbranch:remotebranch ... git pull --remember origin remotebranch:localbranch

instead of

git push --track origin localbranch:remotebranch ... git pull

The one thing I want to avoid, is specifying the "origin localbranch:remotebranch" stuff twice.

Doesn't make git pull --remember a bad idea, it's good in many other cases. But in my specific use case, git push --track is the most useful one.

Rudolf