Re: [RFC/PATCH 3/3] push: add separate 'downstream' branch
- From
Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
- Date
- May 16, 2013, 11:31 UTC
- Message-ID
- <CALkWK0nBUHHkqOQannMu5Kjs00Fro8KBbiocfsT4Uf74jO9FgA@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <CAMP44s1eB+bvg7vnG5S3SBACHTrkpCqJNX-Q2tzEVdvzFWvkcA@mail.gmail.com>
Felipe Contreras wrote:
Show 9 quoted lines
> Would I be able to do:
>
> % git branch --set-upstream-to origin/master --set-downstream-to
> github/fc/master
>
> ?
>
> Would I see these branches when I do 'git branch -vv'?
> Would I be able to do 'git push next@{downstream}'?Hm, losing this functionality in the name of generality would certainly be very undesirable.
> That is orthogonal to 'branch.A.push' the same way 'remote.B.fetch' is > orthogonal to 'branch.A.merge'.
Not at all (which is what I've been trying to say). remote.<name>.fetch is operated on by fetch, while branch.<name>.merge is operated on by merge; they are really orthogonal. What happens if both branch.<name>.push and remote.<name>.push are set? What will push do?
Perhaps we should get both, and get branch.<name>.push to override remote.<name>.push. The issue being @{d} will not work if remote.<name>.push is set. Then again, since we're targeting Gerrit users here, I don't really think it's an issue: refs/for/master is not really a "downstream branch"; it's a pseudo-ref that Gerrit handles internally.