Ben Boeckel <mathstuf@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 13:34:18 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Changes to these two files look reasonable.
>>
>> Don't you want to protect this feature from future breakage by
>> others by adding a couple of tests, though, to t/t5505?
>
> Thanks, I've done so locally. It actually brings up this case:
>
> $ git remote add someremote foo
> $ git remote get-url --push someremote
> fatal: no URLs configured for remote 'someremote'
>
> Is it better to use:
>
> remote = remote_get(remotename);
> remote->pushurl;
>
> if (remote->pushurl_nr)
> remote->pushurl;
> else
> remote->url;
>
> or:
>
> remote = pushremote_get(remotename);
> remote->pushurl;
>
> ? What is the actual difference between the two?
You tell me ;-)
The default remote based on the current branch is computed
differently based on the direction of the transfer, I think.
struct remote *remote_get(const char *name)
{
return remote_get_1(name, remote_for_branch);
}
struct remote *pushremote_get(const char *name)
{
return remote_get_1(name, pushremote_for_branch);
}
When you are not giving name explicitly, the second parameter to _1
function is used to determine the name.
--
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