You've summarized the difference in your question. upstream
pushes to the configured upstream branch, while current
assumes the upstream branch has the same name as the current local branch, and pushes to that specific name. In reality, there's no reason to assume a local branch's upstream tracking branch has the same name as the local branch itself.
For example, if you work in multiple repositories or across many shared developer remotes, you often end up tracking different forks of the same branch, such as allen-master
or susan-master
, both of which track the master
branch in Allen and Susan's repos, respectively. In this case, current
would be the incorrect setting, because those branch names don't exist on their remotes. upstream
, however, would work just fine.
A more practical example might be tracking both a development
and production
repository. Your workflow might use a different mainline branch for each, but that might get confusing. Suppose you were a code integrator and wanted to track both repositories' master
branches separately.
git checkout -b production --track production/master
git checkout -b development --track development/master
Now you've got two branches that track their respective repositories, neither of which use the master
naming convention at all. There's little confusion about the branch names: They explicitly describe what they track. Nevertheless, push.default = current
wouldn't make any sense as neither remote contains a development
or production
branch.
与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…