From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 14:19:38 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/6] push: honor branch.*.push
Message-ID: <CALkWK0kqyV+MTW8jDDBt-qEB1R7yvD+n4nTxwvW0QjA13J2=2A@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vhagndis4.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>   # on branch master, derived from origin
>>   $ git push ram
>>
>> And branch.master.push is set to next?  Will you let her shoot herself
>> in the foot like this?
>
> It is not shooting in the foot, if branch.master.push is explicitly
> set to update next.  I do not see any issue in that part.

The question does not pertain to master being mapped to next; it
pertains to central-workflow versus triangular-workflow: origin versus
ram.  If the user has set push.default to upstream, she _expects_
triangular pushes to always be denied, and this is the first violation
of that rule.  I'm tilting towards building a dependency between
branch.<name>.push and push.default.