On Wednesday, October 29, 2008 at 22:12:18 (-0700) Sam Vilain writes: >On Wed, 2008-10-29 at 09:23 -0600, Bill Lear wrote: >> We use git in a way that makes it desirable for us to only push/pull >> to the same remote branch. So, if I'm in branch X, I want 'git push' >> to push to origin/X, and 'git pull' to fetch into origin/X and then >> merge into X from origin/X. >> >> In other words, we want git push/pull to behave in branches other than >> master the same way it does when in master. >> >> I have discovered the '--track' option when creating a local branch, >> and this appears to me to be the thing that gives us the desired >> behavior. > >As things currently stand this is not achievable behaviour. The >behaviour of 'git push' is to push all matching refs. If you are lucky >this is what you intended, but it also pushes any changes to *other* >branches that you have made. > >I have tabled a change proposal to make it work as you suggest in a >separate thread. Ok, now I'm confused. The ONLY thing I want to prevent is the "crossing of streams" issue. If I am on branch X and issue 'git push', I want X, and ONLY X, to be pushed to the remote repository's X branch --- I don't care if other branches are pushed to their respective remote branches, as long as they don't get merged to X. So, are you saying that Santi was incorrect, and that in fact the push will result in a merge of the branches? Bill -- 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
