Subject: Re: push.default???

From: Andreas Ericsson <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2009 15:21:06 +0200

Finn Arne Gangstad wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 02:59:10PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> [...]
>> Before going on, can you explain your use case for --push=tracking (in a  
>> case where --push=current wouldn't do the same)?
> 
> The idea with "tracking" is to push the current branch to wherever it
> would pull from, making push & pull "equivalent" in some sense.
> 
> This is different from "current" if you have/choose to name the local
> branch something else than the remote branch. This happens a lot when
> using multiple remotes.
> 
> E.g. some remotes have only a single active branch called "master",
> and you have to name it something else locally, or several people have
> local branches called "beta", and you have to name it something like
> "fred-beta" locally if you are working on fred's beta.
> 

Umm. Why not name it after the feature you're working on instead of the
branch you started from? That way, you get fred/beta (assuming you've
added Fred's repo as a remote named "fred" ofcourse) and all your
branches have names that never (in theory) clash with any of your
upstreams.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   [email-masked]
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231

Considering the successes of the wars on alcohol, poverty, drugs and
terror, I think we should give some serious thought to declaring war
on peace.