Re: [PATCH] git-push.txt: mention about remote.*.push when no refspec is given

2013-03-08 Thread Junio C Hamano
Duy Nguyen writes: > On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 1:09 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> I agree that saying what it is, what it does or what it is for >> upfront (i.e. "Specifies what are pushed") before how it is spelled >> is an improvement. I however think describing "If not specified" >> here was a m

Re: [PATCH] git-push.txt: mention about remote.*.push when no refspec is given

2013-03-08 Thread Duy Nguyen
On Thu, Mar 7, 2013 at 1:09 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I agree that saying what it is, what it does or what it is for > upfront (i.e. "Specifies what are pushed") before how it is spelled > is an improvement. I however think describing "If not specified" > here was a mistake, and you are making

Re: [PATCH] git-push.txt: mention about remote.*.push when no refspec is given

2013-03-06 Thread Junio C Hamano
Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy writes: > remote.*.push is considered before push.default, but there's no > mention about that, except a bit in the examples. The description > of push.default does say something about this, but it would be easier > to find out if it's described here. > > The first paragraph

[PATCH] git-push.txt: mention about remote.*.push when no refspec is given

2013-03-06 Thread Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy
remote.*.push is considered before push.default, but there's no mention about that, except a bit in the examples. The description of push.default does say something about this, but it would be easier to find out if it's described here. The first paragraph describing refspec format is moved down, s