Re: push.default: current vs upstream
- From
- Jehan Bing <jehan@orb.com>
- Date
- Apr 6, 2012, 18:01 UTC
- Message-ID
- <jlnb1k$rdn$1@dough.gmane.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <20120406080004.GA27940@sigill.intra.peff.net>
On 2012-04-06 01:00, Jeff King wrote:
> On the other hand, one thing we have not talked about is how one gets > into the "topic push fast-forwards master" situation. Which is running: > > $ git checkout -b topic origin/master
That's what I was starting to think myself. This whole discussion about "current" is that it may not a good choice because "push" will not behave like "pull". But I believe the real problem is that _pull_ doesn't behave like _push_.
In other word, maybe "git checkout -b topic origin/master" shouldn't create a tracking branch in the first place (unless one uses "--track" or that some config setting has been explicitly set). Or more precisely, I believe it should be create a tracking branch only if the local branch name is the same as the remote's branch. (And the same for "git branch <local> origin/<remote>" of course)
How many newbies/clueless people will think that a branch "topic" tracks a branch "origin/master"? And how many of these same people will think that a branch "topic" doesn't track a branch "origin/topic"? For that matter, that's how I use git myself. And until it's easy to see what branch tracks what (i.e. until "git branch" shows the tracking branches), I don't want to think differently because it's just too risky.
So for the "me too" votes: - +1 to change change "push.default" to current - +1 to change "git checkout -b" to not create a tracking branch unless the local name matches the remote name .