threads / discuss / 44757

Making it possible to do “git push origin” instead of “git push origin <branch>”, without having to one-time prepare each branch for it

Subject: Making it possible to do “git push origin” instead of “git push origin <branch>”, without having to one-time prepare each branch for it

## tl;dr

5 messages between Dec 22, 2016 and Dec 27, 2016.

replies: 4people: 3as markdown or json

Stefan Monov· Dec 22, 2016, 21:14 UTC · lore
Hi.
I'd like to use just:
    git push
or at most:
    git push origin

rather than having to first check which is the active branch with `git branch --list`, then type:

    git push origin <branch>
At [1] and [2] I've seen that if I do this once:
    git push -u origin <branch>

then from then on I can use just `git push` _for that branch_. However, I don't want to do this "setup" step for each branch, because it's extra work that I also may forget to do.

Why is this "setup" step necessary and can I avoid it?

Thanks, Stefan

[1] http://stackoverflow.com/q/19312622 [2] http://stackoverflow.com/q/6529136

Stefan Monov· Dec 22, 2016, 21:18 UTC · re: Stefan Monov · lore

Re: Making it possible to do “git push origin” instead of “git push origin <branch>”, without having to one-time prepare each branch for it

Also, if I do the "setup" step (`push -u`) for a branch that doesn't exist yet (neither on my PC nor on the server), does that remove the need to do `git checkout -b <branch>` first?

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 11:14 PM, Stefan Monov <logixoul@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 30 quoted lines
> Hi.
>
> I'd like to use just:
>
>     git push
>
> or at most:
>
>     git push origin
>
> rather than having to first check which is the active branch with `git
> branch --list`, then type:
>
>     git push origin <branch>
>
> At [1] and [2] I've seen that if I do this once:
>
>     git push -u origin <branch>
>
> then from then on I can use just `git push` _for that branch_.
> However, I don't want to do this "setup" step for each branch, because
> it's extra work that I also may forget to do.
>
> Why is this "setup" step necessary and can I avoid it?
>
> Thanks,
> Stefan
>
> [1] http://stackoverflow.com/q/19312622
> [2] http://stackoverflow.com/q/6529136
Junio C Hamano· Dec 22, 2016, 21:41 UTC · re: Stefan Monov · lore

Re: Making it possible to do “git push origin” instead of “git push origin <branch>”, without having to one-time prepare each branch for it

Stefan Monov <logixoul@gmail.com> writes:
Show 12 quoted lines
> I'd like to use just:
>
>     git push
>
> or at most:
>
>     git push origin
>
> rather than having to first check which is the active branch with `git
> branch --list`, then type:
>
>     git push origin <branch>
Perhaps you are a target audience of
    $ git config push.default current
then?
Jacob Keller· Dec 22, 2016, 21:46 UTC · re: Stefan Monov · lore

Re: Making it possible to do “git push origin” instead of “git push origin <branch>”, without having to one-time prepare each branch for it

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 1:14 PM, Stefan Monov <logixoul@gmail.com> wrote:
Show 30 quoted lines
> Hi.
>
> I'd like to use just:
>
>     git push
>
> or at most:
>
>     git push origin
>
> rather than having to first check which is the active branch with `git
> branch --list`, then type:
>
>     git push origin <branch>
>
> At [1] and [2] I've seen that if I do this once:
>
>     git push -u origin <branch>
>
> then from then on I can use just `git push` _for that branch_.
> However, I don't want to do this "setup" step for each branch, because
> it's extra work that I also may forget to do.
>
> Why is this "setup" step necessary and can I avoid it?
>
> Thanks,
> Stefan
>
> [1] http://stackoverflow.com/q/19312622
> [2] http://stackoverflow.com/q/6529136

Try setting "push.default" configuration setting, see "git help config" and search for push.default

I *think* what you want is "push.default = current" but you should read up on each option.

Thanks, Jake

← back to recent threads