Mathias Kunter wrote:
> Am 31.05.21 um 19:31 schrieb Felipe Contreras:
> > Once those patches are merged, then I will probably send the one to
> > change the behavior.
> >
> > I will include you in the Cc list when I do so.
>
> Thank you very much.
>
> > In my experience you need to convince either Junio Hamano, or Jeff King
> > for any change in behavior to happen, and until they do comment on this
> > one it's fair to say it won't happen.
>
> I assume they are on this mailing list?
Of course, and they are also on the Cc list of this mail.
> I'd say it should be quite an argument if the related StackOverflow
> question dealing with this exact issue is one of the top-voted git
> questions of all time. [1]
That seems to be a different issue. Related, but not quite the same.
That question is answered at the time the user tries to make a push:
fatal: The current branch fix-1 has no upstream branch.
To push the current branch and set the remote as upstream, use
git push --set-upstream origin fix-1
That's literally the top answer in SO.
> It seems that millions of developers (judging by the number of views of
> that question) wonder what they need to do so that "git pull and git
> push will work immediately" on a newly created local branch.
Yes, probably many people do wonder that, but not necessarily all of
them (at least of the ones that participatd in that SO question).
> If that would "just work" out of the box and with the default settings
> of git, without having to read up the solution in StackOverflow first,
> then it would certainly be an improvement for a huge number of people.
I agree, but I have already tried to improve the interface in a number
of ways to no avail.
Inertia is a powerful force.
We'll see how this one goes.
Cheers.
--
Felipe Contreras
