From: Felipe Contreras Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 15:14:21 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] doc: push: explain default=simple correctly Message-ID: <60b4fd4db5dee_24d282088c@natae.notmuch> In-Reply-To: <3e5c2303-030e-928e-af57-8e2be8f3ce86@gmail.com> Mathias Kunter wrote: > Am 30.05.21 um 21:09 schrieb Felipe Contreras: > >>> The current branch is pushed to the corresponding upstream branch, but > >>> as a safety measure, the push is aborted if the upstream branch does not > >>> have the same name as the local one. > > > > Except that isn't accurate. > > > > git clone $url > > git checkout -b fix-1 > > # do commits > > git push > > > > Does that push the current branch to the corresponding upstream branch? > > I see. Then maybe reword to something like this: > > > The current branch is pushed to a branch with the same name on the > > remote, but as a safety measure, the push is aborted if a corresponding > > upstream branch does not have the same name as the local one. > > In your above example, I'm in centralized workflow, but I can still push > the fix-1 branch to origin without having to configure an upstream > branch for it. No, you can't: % git push fatal: The current branch fix-1 has no upstream branch. To push the current branch and set the remote as upstream, use git push --set-upstream origin fix-1 Isn't that problem the one you originally described [1]? The behavior doesn't change if you don't specify the remote: `git push` == `git push origin`. > So this seems to contradict with the currently proposed > wording: > > > If you are working on a centralized workflow, then you need to configure > > an upstream branch with the same name. My wording is correct, and that's precisely the problem. Maybe you are thinking this patch series implements the fix I proposed: it doesn't. The two patch series merely reorganizes the code to make it simpler and easier to understand. No functionality changes. Cheers. [1] https://lore.kernel.org/git/065528bf-b496-83d3-767d-2a78e50a9edf@gmail.com -- Felipe Contreras