Re: [PATCH 2/2] format-patch: introduce format.defaultTo

> On Mon, Jan 06, 2014 at 12:06:51PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> Unless you set @{u} to this new configuration, in which case the
>> choice becomes dynamic depending on the current branch, but
>> 
>>  - if that is the only sane choice based on the current branch, why
>>    not use that as the default without having to set the
>>    configuration?
>> 
>>  - Or if that is still insufficient, don't we need branch.*.forkedFrom
>>    that is different from branch.*.merge, so that different branches
>>    you want to show "format-patch" output can have different
>>    reference points?
>
> Yeah, I had similar thoughts. I personally use "branch.*.merge" as
> "forkedFrom", and it seems like we are going that way anyway with things
> like "git rebase" and "git merge" defaulting to upstream. But then there
> is "git push -u" and "push.default = upstream", which treats the
> upstream config as something else entirely.
>
> So it seems like there is already some confusion, and either way we go,
> thisis making it worse to some degree (I do not blame Ram, but rather he
> has stumbled into a hidden sand pit that we have been building for the
> past few years... :).
>
> I wonder if it is too late to try to clarify this dual usage. It kind of
> seems like the push config is "this is the place I publish to". Which,
> in many workflows, just so happens to be the exact same as the place you
> forked from. Could we introduce a new branch.*.pushupstream variable
> that falls back to branch.*.merge? Or is that just throwing more fuel on
> the fire (more sand in the pit in my analogy, I guess).
>
> I admit I haven't thought it through yet, though. And even if it does
> work, it may throw a slight monkey wrench in the proposed push.default
> transition.