From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2026 22:28:17 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] revisions: add @{default} shorthand for default branch
Message-ID: <xmqqcy2mwzjy.fsf@gitster.g>
In-Reply-To: <d92bd08f-abee-49a6-89ad-3be5e0c06ad6@gmail.com>

Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:

> ... Please 
> correct me if I'm wrong but I think maybe what you're asking for is a 
> shorthand for the branch "$b" where
>
> 	git push origin $b
>
> would update the remote tracking branch pointed to by "origin/HEAD". 
> I've not really thought this through but if that is what you want maybe 
> we could add "@{local}" to give that branch. Then, with the default 
> refspecs and with "origin/HEAD" pointing to "origin/master", 
> "origin@{local}" would be "refs/heads/master". If you created a feature 
> branch with
>
> 	git checkout -b feature origin
>
> and you wanted to merge it into the local branch corresponding to the 
> default branch on its upstream remote you could do
>
> 	git checkout feature@{upstream}@{local}
> 	git merge feature

I do not know if that is what Harald is looking for, but I did
wonder if we have use cases like that where we can string together
multiple @{modifier} after a branch name.  The @{local} thing that
takes a remote-tracking branch and gives the local branch that would
push to would be a "reverse" of @{push}; I wonder if three is need
for a similar concept for a reverse of @{upstream} and if so, it
would also be @{local-something-else}, and we may want to name this
one not just @{local} but @{local-something}.

That "feature@{upstream}@{local}" notation is a great food for
thought.

Thanks.