Re: Using push.default with push.remote.push

From: Robert Dailey <rcdailey.lists@gmail.com>
Date: Mar 11, 2020, 17:01 UTC
Message-ID: <CAHd499Dbqa9jZ0bLTiayy+S6c1si1wOYddA1SDUz22g-Jp-TQg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHd499AGQ5k7ON+YY84b6LY1sh9MOw8fsrE2shOibujX1iKeiQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 11:56 AM Robert Dailey <rcdailey.lists@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 20 quoted lines

>
> On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 11:25 AM Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> > > The current behavior seems to be working as designed, but not as
> > > desired. The first push command pushes *all* branches under
> > > `refs/heads/*`, instead of just the current branch as it normally
> > > would via `push.default` setting. It sort of feels like if a resolved,
> > > explicitly defined `push.<remote>.push` config is found *and* it
> > > includes wildcards, the `push.default` setting should still be
> > > respected.
> >
> > Then when would remote.*.push with a wildcard ever do anything?
>
> Maybe this is where a potential disconnect is, but I've always viewed
> the wildcard refspec as a mapping, rather than an all-inclusive "Push
> all the things". In other words, I view it as more of a structural
> guide than a behavioral one. I recognize I probably have this wrong,
> but it probably speaks to how some users view it, or at least, some
> valid use cases to have more of a structural mechanism to map branches
> to remote repositories, with `git push --all` being a supplement to
> say "Push all branches using this mapping".

Also, apologies, I forgot to include a response to your first reply to my OP:

I think `branch.*.pushRef` in this case is not enough. It implies that for every branch I want to be mapped in this way, I'd have to manually specify this config. Rather, I think a `remote.*.pushRef` would be more appropriate, so that it would automatically set the `branch.*.pushRef` version as needed, so I only set up the mapping once.

It could also be I don't fully understand your recommendation, so apologies of that's the case.