Currently, do_push() in push.c calls remote_get(), which gets the
configured remote for fetching and pushing. Replace this call with a
call to pushremote_get() instead, a new function that will return the
remote configured specifically for pushing. This function tries to
work with the string push
Currently, do_push() in push.c calls remote_get(), which gets the
configured remote for fetching and pushing. Replace this call with a
call to pushremote_get() instead, a new function that will return the
remote configured specifically for pushing. This function tries to
work with the string push
Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>
- struct remote *remote = remote_get(repo);
+ struct remote *remote = pushremote_get(repo);
>>>
>>> "struct remote" has url and pushurl fields. What do they mean in the
>>> context of these two accessors? /
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>
>>> --- a/builtin/push.c
>>> +++ b/builtin/push.c
>>> @@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ static int push_with_options(struct transport
>>> *transport, int flags)
>>> static int do_push(const char *repo, int flags)
>>> {
>>> int i, errs;
>>> -struct re
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Jonathan Nieder writes:
>>> - struct remote *remote = remote_get(repo);
>>> + struct remote *remote = pushremote_get(repo);
>>
>> "struct remote" has url and pushurl fields. What do they mean in the
>> context of these two accessors? /me is confused.
>>
>> Is the ide
Jonathan Nieder writes:
>> --- a/builtin/push.c
>> +++ b/builtin/push.c
>> @@ -322,7 +322,7 @@ static int push_with_options(struct transport
>> *transport, int flags)
>> static int do_push(const char *repo, int flags)
>> {
>> int i, errs;
>> -struct remote *remote = remote_get(repo);
Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
>This patch has no visible impact, but
> serves to enable future patches to introduce configuration variables
> to set pushremote_name. For example, you can now do the following in
> handle_config():
>
> if (!strcmp(key, "remote.pushdefa
Currently, do_push() in push.c calls remote_get(), which gets the
configured remote for fetching and pushing. Replace this call with a
call to pushremote_get() instead, a new function that will return the
remote configured specifically for pushing. This function tries to
work with the string push
Ramkumar Ramachandra writes:
> ... There is no implicit fallback (like
> "origin"): it just falls back to the .remote codepath, if not
> explicitly specified.
That one sentence is enough to explain the apparent asymmetry, which
bothered me.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsu
Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Ramkumar Ramachandra writes:
>
>> if (name)
>> name_given = 1;
>> else {
>> - name = default_remote_name;
>> - name_given = explicit_default_remote_name;
>> + if (pushremote_name) {
>> + name
Ramkumar Ramachandra writes:
> if (name)
> name_given = 1;
> else {
> - name = default_remote_name;
> - name_given = explicit_default_remote_name;
> + if (pushremote_name) {
> + name = pushremote_name;
> +
Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote:
> Currently, do_push() in push.c calls remote_get(), which gets the
> configured remote for fetching and pushing. Replace this call with a
> call to pushremote_get() instead, a new function that will return the
> remote configured specifically for pushing. This functi
Currently, do_push() in push.c calls remote_get(), which gets the
configured remote for fetching and pushing. Replace this call with a
call to pushremote_get() instead, a new function that will return the
remote configured specifically for pushing. This function tries to
work with the string push
13 matches
Mail list logo
