Re: Please discuss: what "git push" should do when you do not say what to push?

[Antony Male <antony.male@gmail.com>]

This is my 2 cents from helping out on #git.  I don't consider workflows 
at all, only how to minimise confusion for new users when they're trying 
to understand how git works.

We occasionally get users who are having trouble understanding why the 
argument-less form of 'git pull' is failing, due to lack of tracking 
configuration.  We explain that the tracking config is git's way of 
"connecting" local and remote branches, and how to use 'git push -u' and 
'git branch --set-upstream' appropriately.

This is all well and good -- they've discovered that local and remote 
branches are separate, that they aren't "magically" joined, that there's 
a bit of configuration data which "connects" the two, and how to 
manipulate it.

Users then assume that argument-less form of 'git push' uses the same 
mechanism.  To then discover that it (by default) uses a different way 
of "connecting" local and remote branches is often confusing [1].  In 
addition, it can't be manipulated in the same way as the tracking config 
they learnt about before.

For this reason, I am in favour of push.default = upstream. Although it 
requires knowledge about setting up tracking config (in the cases where 
tracking config isn't set automatically), this knowledge has to be 
gained anyway for the argument-less form of 'git pull' to work.


[1]: Indeed, a lot of users only find out about this difference when it 
has bitten them in some way.

Thanks,
Antony