From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E0CB1F9FD for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 20:46:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S230051AbhCHUqH (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Mar 2021 15:46:07 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:54566 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229775AbhCHUpn (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Mar 2021 15:45:43 -0500 Received: from mail-qv1-xf29.google.com (mail-qv1-xf29.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::f29]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 849D0C06174A for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2021 12:45:43 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-qv1-xf29.google.com with SMTP id dj14so5328829qvb.1 for ; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 12:45:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ttaylorr-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=9VbebeftMSb2skZH/+TJAuwisWifxrtmHd082R31/bE=; b=Qi2IX0nhdAfPdn3ucf8JHBTqvFsv4Ja3FNVStEI6zE0hNt84InfKYIRxP+Jq55uzQf 5xrxbw4VfNM4rfdTcdD7eMhK1iXVScIn2JGgRW1mHUGoZrUGZdtEXP0VypzLSlgh4tR3 Xcta9BHpW1G/KtcIoiTXf5iD6AU3tr1AdU30iOFMOj51FlxyqD8uhJKt0iHpsgP9W1cG 2saI3Bac+mbRwnHg4sQyOTaG8gQlNk391Fpwkd2j6gGWDjedM5YmZ/8yI2azi/8WFdwe bv2nmkWrUv7dI2S+zYV0EMoo+WGuN1QLiDSvE94PuQ8IigRwOXwa3gW1DKCMo8BEjRhL ygfg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to; bh=9VbebeftMSb2skZH/+TJAuwisWifxrtmHd082R31/bE=; b=R05/qhe3DCZO3fVEGbKVFCbqfmI5miftfN1egcalZvjQZi+XoAkKY8BaWLZy1r+kN9 vMpg/sI55Eeb+t+ag0geq8APqMa7/T9zG99uqVOlzSIJQfbh0lcR2m5+ySPKe2AQNFX4 e60cg4qFZYPDF7/pgI+Q59s2ax9NYx435/Ph9sQ9ST/ZU2b4KNxvn0VQXxhuNB+VzNFU YatiHEUh/uq/x164YN+vsNyFvP2PA/Veyqq2x0VxTOA5ySikO4lvGLCygcQ/a2gpZuKU 6pVmUqDFAcCPYHTG4mlV2wiOWW9pjq6rNO/9mjrH2ER5D1aiGnT0AhkRz20PzudT+wHF oOVA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532ZnpKz7Krnhc5AshIFr5Gm161Xug6egttLBrkzvcXeqX/POLX5 QN4/jsJqAHAYfEj93gjb8QrcTg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzUFpqnO25UJAJof0P1q/9kiw5VjHGPfwiFxpOYIu8rpx15+sN3RY9xR4Qr90fc8cSnB2TGHQ== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6214:194f:: with SMTP id q15mr22937535qvk.46.1615236342681; Mon, 08 Mar 2021 12:45:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2605:9480:22e:ff10:d4a3:1166:858b:6d61]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v35sm8632357qtb.20.2021.03.08.12.45.42 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 08 Mar 2021 12:45:42 -0800 (PST) Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2021 15:45:34 -0500 From: Taylor Blau To: Andreas Schwab Cc: Taylor Blau , Junio C Hamano , Fabien Terrani , git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: remote..merge missing from the git-config man page? Message-ID: References: <87pn092yja.fsf@igel.home> <87lfax2xat.fsf@igel.home> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87lfax2xat.fsf@igel.home> Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 09:41:14PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote: > >> > `git push origin`:: > >> > Without additional configuration, pushes the current branch to > >> > - the configured upstream (`remote.origin.merge` configuration > >> > + the configured upstream (`branch..merge` configuration > >> > variable) if it has the same name as the current branch, and > >> > errors out without pushing otherwise. > >> > >> That doesn't say what is. Is that supposed to be ? > >> Also, what is "it" referring to in "if it has the same name"? > > > > refers to the currently-checked-out branch's local name. (That's > > how it's used in Documentation/config/branch.txt). > > > > The antecedent is "the current branch", so I think that this one may > > already be quite clear if you read past the parenthesis. > > That doesn't make sense: "if the current branch has the same name as the > current branch". OK, now I see where your confusion is. I was incorrect in saying the antecedent was "the current branch"; it should instead by "the configured upstream". IOW, "if both your and the remote copy call the branch you have checked out the same thing." Re-reading the original wording, I still think that it is clear enough to communicate what I wrote above, but if there is an alternative wording you find clearer, I would certainly welcome suggestions. Thanks, Taylor