Re: git push default behaviour?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On 8 March 2012 12:54, Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Carlos Martín Nieto <cmn@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> On Thu, 2012-03-08 at 10:13 +0000, Jeremy Morton wrote:
>>> Right, so I guess I'm saying that the default value for push.default
>>> should be upstream instead of matching...
>>
>> Any default is going to leave some people unhappy. If upstream is the
>> right thing for you, then that's what you should use. Most questions I
>> see about push not doing what the users expect would actually benefit
>> from 'current'. 'matching' is a fairly safe default, as it won't try to
>> push private branches or changes in private branches that track
>> something upstream.
>
> There were some discussions about changing the default, and I thought
> people agreed that 'upstream' was a better default value for
> push.default:
>
>  http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/167149
>
> it needs to be done with a sane migration path, however, and I guess no
> one stepped in to start the process (but I may have missed some further
> discussions).

>From the point of view of new users the current default is sub-optimal
and confusing. I actually find the current default an odd choice, as I
personally have *never* wanted to push all the branches at once, nor
have I ever seen a colleague want to do that.

cheers,
Yves

-- 
perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]