Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> if (name)
> name_given = 1;
> else {
> - name = default_remote_name;
> - name_given = explicit_default_remote_name;
> + if (pushremote_name) {
> + name = pushremote_name;
> + name_given = 1;
> + } else {
> + name = default_remote_name;
> + name_given = explicit_default_remote_name;
> + }
> }
The code to read branch.$name.remote configuration flips
explicit_default_remote_name to one when it is used to set the
default_remote_name, and that controls the value of name_given in
this codepath. At this point in the series, you do not have a
corresponding branch.$name.pushremote, but your [6/6] does not seem
to do the same.
Why isn't it necessary to add explicit_default_pushremote_name and
do the same here in patch [6/6]?
--
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