On Jul 21, 2010, at 2:20 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Magnus Hagander <mag...@hagander.net> wrote: >>> 6. Finally, you must push your changes back to the server. >>> >>> git push >>> >>> This will push changes in all branches you've updated, but only branches >>> that also exist on the remote side will be pushed; thus, you can have >>> local working branches that won't be pushed. >>> >>> ==> This is true, but I have found it saner to configure push.default = >>> tracking, so that only the current branch is pushes. Some people might >>> find that useful. >> >> Indeed. Why don't I do that more often... >> >> +1 on making that a general recommendation, and have people only not >> do that if they really know what they're doing :-) > > Hmm, I didn't know about that option. What makes us think that's the > behavior people will most often want? Because it doesn't seem like > what I want, just for one example...
So you're working on some back branch, and make a WIP commit so you can switch to master to make a quick commit. Create a push on master. Bare git push. WIP commit gets pushed upstream. Oops. Regards, David -- David Christensen End Point Corporation da...@endpoint.com -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
