Re: git push default doesn't make sense

[Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>]

Mathias Kunter wrote:
> 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?

It's not really a patch (yet), but yeah: it will.

-- 
Felipe Contreras