Re: Random thoughts on "upstream"

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: May 18, 2013, 22:33 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMP44s1Rv1zobP99z6dNKhSXgBgvWa+1-BZL-Pi1HWo3vrK6vw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALkWK0kYKZGhthdrb6-7RD_c2A7E9rscAZU3=JHM-4rYre6w=Q@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, May 18, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Having said that I am not sure where your "not overly fond of" comes
>> from, as I do not see a problem with branch.<name>.push.  The only
>> problem I may have with the approach would arise _only_ if we make
>> it the sole way to allow people push to different names, forcing
>> people who want to push N branches to configure it N times.  Other
>> than that, I think it is an acceptable solution to give per-branch
>> control.
>
> It doesn't strike me as being elegant at all.
>
> [branch "hot-branch"]
>     remote = ram
>     push = refs/heads/for-junio/hot-branch

s/remote/pushremote/

> 1.  I git branch -M for-each-ref and push.  Screwed.

Can't parse that.

Show 9 quoted lines

> 2.  Let's say you give me the thumbs up to write hot-branch to origin.
>  Excitedly, I change the remote to origin.  Now I already have push
> semantics for origin (you obviously want me to write to rr/, so I can
> cooperate with others):
>
> [remote "origin"]
>     push = refs/heads/*:refs/heads/rr/*
>
> Unfortunately, it doesn't kick in unless I change branch.<name>.push.

If course it doesn't that's what you told git to do. Of course, you could simply do:

% git branch --set-downstream-to origin/rr/for-junio/hot-branch

Or if you are going to push multiple branches and set a 'remote.<name>.push':

% git branch --unset-downstream

Show 7 quoted lines

> I guess what I'm saying is: refspec semantics are inherent properties
> of the remote, not of the local branch.  Since there is no
> intermediate refs/remotes/* sitting between the remote and local
> branches, this is _not_ like branch.<name>.merge at all.  That is why
> I'm tiling towards remote.<name>.push: we're not giving up any
> functionality anyway; there's nothing we can't do without
> branch.<name>.push.

Yes there is, I thought you already acknowledged that:

% git branch --set-downstream-to github/fc/master % git rebase -i @{downstream}

-- 
Felipe Contreras