Re: [RFC/PATCH] push: introduce implicit push

From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 15, 2013, 09:35 UTC
Message-ID: <CALkWK0nNn_dGgr8F-kcQZm9UfkZAKwBd0bPSW9yCex4L9F+4Qw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vppxw335o.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

> That "changing the meaning of <name>" in the middle, and doing so
> will be confusing to the users, is exactly the issue, isn't it?

Yes, but we have to change _something_ if we don't want to hit a WTF like 'git push master next' pushing master and next to branch.<HEAD>.pushremote. In my opinion, this seems to be the less evil (or disruptive) change. After all, we're not proposing to change the current behavior of any current git invocations: a plain git push can still consider branch.<HEAD>.pushremote, and it's not a problem in my opinion. After all, a git fetch also considers branch.<HEAD>.remote, and we all agree that this is fine.

1. We are changing the meaning of branch.<name>.remote, but this is
not inconsistent with the current behavior of push.default at all
(even push.default=matching).  We just have to improve the
push.default documentation.

2. We are not changing the meaning of _any_ existing git push
invocations.  Pushing "unrelated branches" to the "corresponding
remote" has not been possible until now (unless you check out each of
the branches, set push.default=current, and git push), and we're
inventing a new syntax that makes this possible.  I see no problem
with changing the meaning of branch.<name>.remote/pushremote for this
purpose.

Show 6 quoted lines

> Just like Peff, I am sympathetic to people who want to omit "where
> to" and have Git automatically make a guess, and would be happy if
> we can find a reasonable solution to that problem.
>
> But I am not convinced what we discussed in these threads are good
> solutions. At least not yet.

There are only so many possibilities, Junio*. You either decide that the logical alternative that I proposed is too confusing and drop the idea, or think about how to move forward minimizing friction.

* If you think there are other possibilities, I'd be glad to hear them.