From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 16 May 2013 13:32:06 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH 3/3] push: add separate 'downstream' branch
Message-ID: <CAMP44s2HPXnudioSSj0O_r2PbmbAqcyTORJNhRL_a=NWu_niBw@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CALkWK0nBUHHkqOQannMu5Kjs00Fro8KBbiocfsT4Uf74jO9FgA@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 6:31 AM, Ramkumar Ramachandra
<artagnon@gmail.com> wrote:
> Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> 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.

I don't even know what that means.

>> 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?

The same that 'git pull' does when both branch.<name>.merge and
remote.<name>.fetch are set.

> Perhaps we should get both, and get branch.<name>.push to override
> remote.<name>.push.

Does branch.<name>.merge overrides remote.<name>.fetch? No. They
complement each other.

> The issue being @{d} will not work if
> remote.<name>.push is set.

Of course it would work. Does @{u} stop working when remote.<name>.fetch 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.

It is a downstream branch.

-- 
Felipe Contreras