Hi, On Tue, 2 Oct 2007, Carl Worth wrote: > On Tue, 2 Oct 2007 10:46:56 +0100 (BST), Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > On Mon, 1 Oct 2007, Carl Worth wrote: > > > And why is that? > > > > Well, if the OP had used "git push <bla> master" instead of "... > > master:master", it would have worked. I am unaware of any tutorial > > that suggests the latter, only of tutorials that suggest the former. > > OK. I was wrong. Somehow I got stuck thinking that "git push <bla> > master" wouldn't create a new remote master branch if it didn't > previously exist. (It's bizarre that I forgot since I've used that for a > long time). > > Sorry about the noise. Nothing to be sorry about. It got me thinking. People propose that "git push <nick> master:blub" should create the branch "refs/heads/blub" on the remote side. My initial reaction was "then you have to be precise, because we do not know if you want to push it as a branch, or as a lightweight tag". But then I stepped back a little: What is most likely meant when you say "master:blub" and there is no tag/branch of name "blub" on the remote side? Exactly, you want a branch to be created. _Except_ if you had a typo, such as "git push ko master:po" where you want to be warned that that ref is not present on the remote side. So I am less opposed to making "master:blub" automatically create a branch "blub" if it does not exist yet. But opposed nevertheless. Ciao, Dscho - 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
