On Sep 28, 2007, at 8:58 AM, Pierre Habouzit wrote:

quoted text
> On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 06:52:47AM +0000, Steffen Prohaska wrote:
>>
>> On Sep 27, 2007, at 9:22 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> So what's the desired semantics?
>>>
>>> The current semantics is:
>>>
>>>   "git push" says "you do not say to which repository?" and
>>>   consults "branch.<current>.remote" but defaults to 'origin'
>>>   if unconfigured.
>>>
>>>   "git push <name>" (or using the <name> determined as above)
>>>   says "you do not say which branches?" and consults
>>>   "remote.<name>.push" to find branches to push out, but
>>>   defaults to 'matching branches' if unconfigured.
>>>
>>> What you would want to change is the fallback behaviour for
>>> unconfigured "remote.<name>.push".  I think it is sensible to
>>> have an option to make it push only the current branch.
>>
>> I'm not sure that changing the fallback behaviour for unconfigured
>> "remote.<name>.push" is sufficient.
>>
>> When "remote.<name>.push" is set I'd expect "git push" to
>> choose only the 'right' remote.<name>.push lines, that is
>> the lines that have the current branch as the local ref.
>> "git push" would only push the current branch, which could be pushed
>> to 0 or more branches on the remote side. If no "remote.<name>.push"
>> contains the current branch as a local ref nothing would happen
>> (maybe a warning?). If several "remote.<name>.push" have the current
>> branch as the local ref the branch would be pushed to several
>> remote branches. But other branches than the current branch
>> would _never_ be pushed if no argument is given to 'git push'.
>
>   I'm not really sure that it makes sense, as by default, git push  
> won't
> create a new remote ref. So unless you have a branch that matches some
> remote ref, but that you never want to push, even when on it and  
> typing
> git push... there is nothing that could happen by mistake.
>
>   So if you don't want to push such a branch, ever, then you should  
> IMHO
> not name it in a way that it matches a refspec in the first place, and
> be safe.

I could have a couple of local branches typically pushed to a couple of
remote branches. "git push origin" would update all remote refs.

But I may also be interested to push only the current branch I'm working
on. I may also have some pending fixes on another branch that should not
be pushed now. Currently I need to do "git push origin  
<current>:<someremote>".

Let me put it as a question: How can I push changes from the current
branch to all remote refs it is configured to push to via  
"remote.<name>.push"
without pushing anything else at the same time?

	Steffen



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html