Ramkumar Ramachandra <artag...@gmail.com> writes:

>       if (name)
>               name_given = 1;
>       else {
> -             name = default_remote_name;
> -             name_given = explicit_default_remote_name;
> +             if (pushremote_name) {
> +                     name = pushremote_name;
> +                     name_given = 1;
> +             } else {
> +                     name = default_remote_name;
> +                     name_given = explicit_default_remote_name;
> +             }
>       }

The code to read branch.$name.remote configuration flips
explicit_default_remote_name to one when it is used to set the
default_remote_name, and that controls the value of name_given in
this codepath.  At this point in the series, you do not have a
corresponding branch.$name.pushremote, but your [6/6] does not seem
to do the same.

Why isn't it necessary to add explicit_default_pushremote_name and
do the same here in patch [6/6]?



--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to