From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] push: start warning upcoming default change for push.default Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:35:23 -0400 Message-ID: <20120313213522.GA27752@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1331281886-11667-1-git-send-email-Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr> <1331288715.21444.38.camel@beez.lab.cmartin.tk> <4F5A4C45.7070406@xiplink.com> <4F5AF1A8.4050604@alum.mit.edu> <4F5E12A5.6030701@xiplink.com> <20120312183725.GA2187@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vehswljxi.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Matthieu Moy , Marc Branchaud , Michael Haggerty , Carlos =?utf-8?Q?Mart=C3=ADn?= Nieto , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Mar 13 22:35:35 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S7ZNT-0007vN-IJ for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 22:35:31 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1758419Ab2CMVf1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:35:27 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:48720 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757809Ab2CMVf0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:35:26 -0400 Received: (qmail 2408 invoked by uid 107); 13 Mar 2012 21:35:37 -0000 Received: from c-71-206-173-132.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.206.173.132) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:35:37 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:35:23 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <7vehswljxi.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Mar 13, 2012 at 06:17:13AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Pushing 'current' from a branch 'topic' forked from either 'master' > or 'origin/master' will create a new branch 'topic' at the central > repository. But that is straightforward and understandable. The user > will see what happened in the feedback from the command, and there > is no need for the user to be experienced enough to know the mapping > of @{upstream} to understand why it happened. "I am on 'topic' and > I pushed, I created 'topic' there". Very simple explanation exists. > [...] > That makes me suspect that 'current' might be a more appropriate > default between the two. From that simple default, those in the > "shared central repository" world can graduate to 'upstream' once > they know what an 'upstream' is and how to take advantage of > per-branch configuration. Similarly, those in the "publish to be > pulled" world would graduate to 'matching'. Thanks for this explanation. When writing my last email, I had a gut feeling about how "current" was a simpler choice, but I didn't quite find the words to explain it. This paragraph (and the rest of the email) covers what I was trying to say. -Peff