Re: documentation for committing with git
От | Robert Haas |
---|---|
Тема | Re: documentation for committing with git |
Дата | |
Msg-id | AANLkTink79tQfCwps-YkrQkMWg7xTyw+W1PmsMgqvP3i@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: documentation for committing with git (Magnus Hagander <magnus@hagander.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: documentation for committing with git
Re: documentation for committing with git |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 3:11 PM, Magnus Hagander <magnus@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... -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: