Re: [RFC/PATCH] push: introduce implicit push

From: Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net>
Date: Apr 15, 2013, 07:07 UTC
Message-ID: <516BA732.4080405@viscovery.net>
In-Reply-To: <7vppxw335o.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Am 4/15/2013 5:04, schrieb Junio C Hamano:

Show 16 quoted lines

> Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> ...  In my proposal, the
>> precedence order branch.<name>.pushremote, remote.pushdefault,
>> branch.<name>.remote, remote.default, origin, remains the same: we
>> just want to change which branch that <name> refers to.
> 
> That "changing the meaning of <name>" in the middle, and doing so
> will be confusing to the users, is exactly the issue, isn't it?
> 
>> In my
>> opinion, it is a much more subtle change than the entirely new
>> precedence order that you're inventing.
> 
> Adding "--" has never been my itch. I just brought it up out of thin
> air as a possible alternative that is less confusing.

User says:

   git push -- master docs release

Then git pushes the three branches to three different upstreams. You find that confusing. Do I understanding correctly so far?

If I were a push.default=(simple|upstream) type, then I would be totally aware that there are three different upstreams involved because I had had to configure them manually and explicitly (correct?), and I would be completely surprised if the push would *not* go to three different upstreams.

Just my 2 cents. (But I'm a traditional "matching" type, so take this with a grain of salt. Or I may be missing the point of this thread, as I haven't followed closely.)

-- Hannes