Re: Proposal: branch.<name>.remotepush
- From
Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 7, 2013, 20:14 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CALkWK0k=k5P8gL-1gNXQ4gO7uNiw9QUUqWrbuf8=iUFfn=TRNg@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CALkWK0=_0hZP_SjMCjooUAr+MrRoXCCzdQF8y9RhW1g7ShsC7w@mail.gmail.com>
Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: >> And yes, a regular `git push origin refs/for/master` is just retarded. > > Actually a git config remote.origin.push refs/heads/*:refs/for/* makes > more sense here.
Sorry about all that confusion. The first line should be `git push origin master:refs/for/master`, but a rule like refs/head/*:refs/for/* is insufficient: what if I want refs/head/*:refs/heads/* for one set of branches (private ones that I don't send for review), and refs/heads/*:refs/for/* for another set (which I send for review)? That certainly won't play well will the existing remote.origin.push; it'd have to behave as an override.