Re: git push default doesn't make sense

[Mathias Kunter <mathiaskunter@gmail.com>]

Am 28.05.21 um 23:12 schrieb Felipe Contreras:

> Cloning automatically sets up an upstream branch for "master", and
> therore it passes the safety check of `push.default=simple`, and that is
> much more dangerous than pushing any other branch.
> 
> Why do we barf with "fix-1", but not "master"? Doesn't make sense.
> 
> This is what we want:
> 
> 	if (centralized &&
> 		(branch->merge_nr && branch->merge && branch->remote_name))
> 	{
> 		if (branch->merge_nr != 1)
> 			die(_("The current branch %s has multiple upstream branches, "
> 			    "refusing to push."), branch->name);
> 
> 		/* Additional safety */
> 		if (strcmp(branch->refname, branch->merge[0]->src))
> 			die_push_simple(branch, remote);
> 	}
> 	refspec_appendf(&rs, "%s:%s", branch->refname, branch->refname);
> 
> 
> In other words: `simple` should be the same as `current`, except when
> there's an upstream branch configured *and* the destination branch has a
> different name.

I guess so. In particular, as a simple git user, I'd expect the 
following to work out of the box, without having to manually adjust the 
configuration settings:

   git clone ssh://originUrl .
   git checkout -b myBranch
   git push           # expected push to origin/myBranch, but fails
   git push origin    # expected push to origin/myBranch, but fails
   git remote add myRemote ssh://myRemoteUrl
   git push myRemote  # expected push to myRemote/myBranch - works

Will your provided patch fix these failing push commands?