Re: push.default???

From: Paolo Bonzini <paolo.bonzini@gmail.com>
Date: Jun 23, 2009, 16:32 UTC
Message-ID: <f865508f0906230932n4a2f2b54s1e76ab1d70d95073@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090623144805.GB24974@pvv.org>

Show 12 quoted lines

>> 1) I have the permission to push to them (as opposed to sending a pull
>> request)?  If I have permission to push only to the mob branch, for
>> example, I would still set my tracking branch to the master branch.
>>
>> 2) I *do* want to push to them often?  If I use tracking for my topic
>> branches, push.default=tracking seems a sure way to big mess when I do
>> "git push" on the wrong branch.
>
> In our shared repositories, we have a few protected branches that only
> integrators can push to, so no one else can accidentally push to
> them. These are typically the branches that it makes sense to track
> "by default".

Yes, on the other hand you cannot push to them, so talking about them in the context if push.default is moot. :-)

Show 6 quoted lines

> If a group sets up a shared public branch, it is typically for
> working together on some feature.
>
> For people used to CVS, this is a nice way to start working with git.
> It requires --tracking to work properly though (--current only works
> if you remember to use the same branch name).

Ok, this *is* a usecase. Your local branch is named as a feature but it pushes into master. Thanks, I have something to reason about now. :-)

Paolo