Re: git push

[Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>]

John Tapsell <johnflux@gmail.com> writes:

>   Following the idea of 'least damage', what do people think of making
> "git push" only push the branch you are currently on?

Having an easy way to ask to push only one branch (typically the currently
checked-out one) is a good thing.  You can obviously say "git push origin
master" (or whatever branch you are on).  We also added "git push origin
HEAD".  I thought we even added "git push HEAD" or "git push --current",
but I may be mistaken.

But if you are talking about changing the default when "git push" is run
without any parameter, I have to say it is a terrible idea, for two
reasons, and one is too obvious to state so I wouldn't repeat it and talk
only about the other one.

I've noticed that people who ask for such a default tend to push too often
and worse they tend to push before they have their act together.  Surely
their other branches may not be ready, but it is likely their current
branch isn't either ;-)

If you shoot for the least damage for such people, the sanest default for
"git push" would be to do nothing.  You *always* say what to push where,
then there is no risk of pushing something you did not intend to.  Perhaps
"push.default = never" configuration may not be such a bad idea?