Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Sergey Organov <sorganov@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
>> So, finally, it's 'branch.linux.pushremote' that is the "offender".
>>
>> Looks like both 'git status' and 'git branch -vv' should somehow learn
>> about 'branch.<name>.pushremote' feature so that their
>> output/suggestions make more sense?
>
> Doesn't "ahead of X by N" mean "you forked from X and built N commits
> on top", not "you have N commits that is not in X which is where you
> would push to"?
Sure, but the problem is that 'git status' gives exact suggestion:
(use "git push" to publish your local commits)
that is somewhat misleading in this particular case ('git push' is now a
no-op), and then 'git branch -vv', while tells me relationship to
"upstream", keeps silence about non-matching push destination.
To add even more complexity to the case, notice that the first time
after I committed locally, the invocation of 'git push' (exactly as
suggested by 'git status') did successfully push those two commits, so
the suggestion is exactly right before the commits are pushed, yet
is rather misleading afterwards.
--
Sergey
