3 ms·

I'm pretty sure "current" in this case is supposed to mean "branch you're currently on", which I'd definitely find more intuitive than "default". On the other

• jlgreco 13y ago
  That is what current means right now. His proposal seems to be "call whatever happens to be the default 'current'". This of course gets you into a non-intuitive "The king is dead, long live the king" sort of situation.
  • hibbelig 13y ago
    I understand that blumentopf meant that "current" should mean "push the current branch", just like "simple" is documented to do. He didn't know that there are actually _two_ behaviors that "push the current branch", and one of them is named "current" whereas the other, new one, is named "simple" ...
  • clhodapp 13y ago
    You are assuming one specific reading, when there are at least two valid ones. The way I read the comment was basically to say, "Geez, what git calls 'simple' ('push the current branch into the remote branch from which you are pulling, but only if they have the same name. This is supposed to be "more safe" for beginners than the "upstream" mode.') sounds like it would be better-named as 'current'. Isn't this obvious to everyone, including the git developers? Why are these unintuitively named options so frequent in git?" That said, I disagree with the sentiment, since there is already a 'current' mode to which the 'current' name seems to apply at least equally well.