On Oct 28, 2007, at 8:28 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@xxxxxx> writes:
You can use a branch's shortname to push it. Push used to create
the branch on the remote side if it did not yet exist. If you
specified the wrong branch accidentally it was created. A safety
valve that pushes only existing branches may help to avoid
errors.
I do not agree with this change.
If you misspelled the branch name (by the way, it is not a
"shortname", but what follows refs/heads/ is _the_ name of the
branch)
True. Is "short refname" the correct wording?
"frotz" as "frtoz", and if a branch with the misspelled
name did _not_ exist locally, it would fail, with or without
this change, which is a good thing.
But if you named "nitfol" that exists locally when you meant to
push "frotz" out, if "nitfol" remotely existed, we will push
that anyway by mistake, even with this change. It will prevent
the push only when "nitfol" did not happen to exist at the
remote side.
My proposed change is more defensive than the current
implementation. It allows distinguishing between "push existing
branch" and "create new branch on the remote side", which I
believe is a good thing. The current implementation uses
the same command line in both cases.
Daniel suggested that git push should print a recommendation
what full ref to use. This would make it easy to correct
the command. Ot you could use the '--create' flag to make
your intention explicit.
If we take the "push origin HEAD" patch, the existence check is
even more important. If you're on the wrong branch and push HEAD
you may be surprised if a new branch is created. This can be
avoided by requiring either a full ref or the '--create' flag.
Earlier there was a discussion to introduce an optional
configuration that makes "git push" without any parameter to
push only the current branch out, in order to help people who
work with shared remote central repository. That might be a
better alternative to avoid pushing out wrong branch by
mistake. That approach would also make your 8/8 unnecessary.
I didn't have the impression that the discussion went in
this direction. There were quite a few people who just said
"git push" is the counter-part of "git fetch". Therefore
"git push" pushes _all_ branches. Period.
With "git push HEAD" 5/8 you could now push only the current branch
(its existence would be verified if 1/8 is also accepted).
8/8 solves a different issue, too. I never advance local branches if
I do not intend to push them. Therefore I can always say "git push"
without any argument. It does always the right thing for me; except
for the annoying error messages that are avoided by 8/8. With 8/8
I can push several local branches while ignoring the ones that I'm
not interested in.
Steffen
-
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
