From: Harald Nordgren <haraldnordgren@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2026 07:44:12 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] branch: suggest <remote>/<branch> on upstream slip
Message-ID: <CAHwyqnXZ_eGUPOhq1hXs==uYuYbRBWw120fXRQa=apWKekxVAQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqechvh8m8.fsf@gitster.g>

> Do we still need the _if_enabled() thing here?  Isn't the caller
> gated with the same condition in this version?
>
> > +     strbuf_release(&remote_ref);
> > +     exit(code);
> > +}
> > +
> >  int cmd_branch(int argc,
> >              const char **argv,
> >              const char *prefix,
> > @@ -957,6 +980,9 @@ int cmd_branch(int argc,
> >               if (!refs_ref_exists(get_main_ref_store(the_repository), branch->refname)) {
> >                       if (!argc || branch_checked_out(branch->refname))
> >                               die(_("no commit on branch '%s' yet"), branch->name);
> > +                     if (argc == 1 &&
> > +                         advice_enabled(ADVICE_SET_UPSTREAM_FAILURE))
> > +                             die_if_upstream_looks_like_remote(new_upstream, argv[0]);
> >                       die(_("branch '%s' does not exist"), branch->name);
> >               }

I think we do, so it will give the advice and tell the user that it
can be disabled in the standard format.


Harald