Re: branch.<name>.pushremote not working with push.default simple or upstream
- From
Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
- Date
- Jun 7, 2013, 16:51 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CALkWK0m0QDGVUmHkmzC7G6it9fJafQCh8+423-NOyMwq9yts1Q@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7v8v2lvs5s.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> This shows the "triangular" support in 1.8.3 is only half-finished; > the other half was discussed a few weeks ago ($gmane/224604)
I intentionally omitted that detail, because it is not directly related to this bug. We have to fix the existing simple and upstream, whether or not we introduce branch.<name>.push. I've personally stopped working on branch.<name>.push, and am focusing on getting @{p} first (you've already seen a dirty wip). The transport code underlying the push is dirty enough, and I'd first like to understand it before bolting on more features.
> I think the > natural extension of the current end-user configuration would be to > redefine "upstream" mode to push to update the branch with the same > name
Right, so does this work?
diff --git a/builtin/push.c b/builtin/push.c index 2d84d10..b253a64 100644 --- a/builtin/push.c +++ b/builtin/push.c @@ -137,11 +137,6 @@ static void setup_push_upstream(struct remote if (branch->merge_nr != 1) die(_("The current branch %s has multiple upstream branches, " "refusing to push."), branch->name); - if (strcmp(branch->remote_name, remote->name)) - die(_("You are pushing to remote '%s', which is not the upstream of\n" - "your current branch '%s', without telling me what to push\n" - "to update which remote branch."), - remote->name, branch->name); if (simple && strcmp(branch->refname, branch->merge[0]->src)) die_push_simple(branch, remote);