Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: >> ... >>> I don't have a strong opinion either way. >> >> No strong opinion either, but I wanted to raise the point to make sure >> we agree. >> >> With your patch, "git push" fails with >> >> fatal: The current branch branch-name has no upstream branch. >> To push the current branch and set the remote as upstream, use >> >> git push --set-upstream origin branch-name >> >> so it's not really bad: the suggestion guides the user to a situation >> where the next "git push" will succeed unambiguously. As a side effect, >> the next "git pull" will fetch from the same branch, which is probably >> what the user wants if he hasn't explicitely configured an upstream >> branch yet. > > Sounds sensible. So what happened to this discussion? Does anybody want to roll the "simple" default based on Peff's patch? -- 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