Re: push.default: current vs upstream

[Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr>]

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@grenoble-inp.fr> writes:
>
>> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>>
>>> Before saying "again", perhaps we should read and think about what the
>>> other side said.  I think [*1*] raises a good point.
>>
>>> *1* http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/194175/focus=194470
>>
>> I think this message precisely supports my claim: we focus the
>> discussion on "git push", without thinking on the big picture "git pull"
>> AND "git push". The message you point to does not talk at all about "git
>> pull".
>
> I do not think so; that "name" argument is about this part from Peff's
> message, to which it is a response:

What I read in the message is that branch names are important, and "same
name" usually have some sort of semantics for users. I agree with that.
But why doesn't the same applies to "git pull"? Why would it be natural
for "git pull" to pull from a branch other than the one with the same
name?

>>> > my two concerns is that this:
>>> >
>>> >   $ git clone ...
>>> >   $ git checkout -b topic origin/master
>>> >   $ hack hack hack
>>> >   $ git push
>>> >
>>> > will try to implicitly fast-forward merge your commits onto master.
>>> 
>>> And the reason why it is surprising to the beginners is?  Because "topic"
>>> and "master" (of "origin/master") are not the same name?
>>
>> Sort of. It is more because "upstream" is an overloaded concept. Perhaps
>> you created the branch from origin/master because you wanted to say
>> "this is where my topic is based, and when I 'rebase -i' later, I want
>> it to be considered the baseline". Or perhaps you meant to say "I am
>> going to work on origin's master branch, but I would prefer to call it
>> 'topic' here".
>
> If you re-read it, it should be clear that this is _also_ about "git pull";
> "I am going to work on origin's master branch" is about pushing the result
> back there.

That's still not clear. Your explanation shows me how "git push" is
involved, not "git pull".

> In the former case, you may want to push it to 'topic' to work further
> with your collaborators.  In the latter case, you would want to push it
> back to 'master', even though you are calling it locally 'topic' for some
> sick reason (read: because you can).

I still don't see pull involved here.

-- 
Matthieu Moy
http://www-verimag.imag.fr/~moy/