Re: [PATCH] push: Re-include "push.default=tracking" in the documentation

["Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 2:13 PM, Matthieu Moy
<Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> wrote:
> Ęvar Arnfjörš Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> That's bad, either we shouldn't support it at all, or we should
>> document what it does. This patch does the latter.
>
> I vaguely remember a similar discussion and probably even a patch in the
> past (maybe by you actually). I think the proposal was to add a mention
> of tracking but avoid promoting it at the same level as the others.
>
> I have a slight preference for a patch adding stg like "`tracking` is a
> deprecated alias supported only for backward compatibility" to the item
> of `upstream`, but I'm OK with the current patch too.

You're right! I wasn't trying to be sneaky here, but apparently I just
keep running into the same things. We talked about this back in 2012,
kicked off by you proposing a patch to remove it completely from
config.txt and me submitting this:
http://www.spinics.net/lists/git/msg198264.html

After some back & forth Junio ended up applying fa23348 to address
that, but that was wiped away just a few months later in 87a70e4.

I'd just like it mentioned in the docs in some way, because I *did*
run into exactly the situation I described in my E-Mail back in 2012,
i.e. found a repo with push.default=tracking and couldn't find any
mention of what it did in the docs.

Junio, looks like from the 2013 discussion that you preferred just
having that mention in parenthesis instead of its own item, how about
just re-applying your fa23348 (with conflicts resolved)?

>> --- a/Documentation/config.txt
>> +++ b/Documentation/config.txt
>> @@ -2344,6 +2344,10 @@ push.default::
>>    pushing to the same repository you would normally pull from
>>    (i.e. central workflow).
>>
>> +* `tracking` - Deprecated synonym for `upstream`, which we still
>> +  support for backwards compatibility with existing configuration
>> +  files.
>
> Nit: I think the doc normally doesn't use "we" this way (we = the Git
> developers or the Git tool). Hence my s/which we still support/still
> supported/ above.
>
> --
> Matthieu Moy
> http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/