From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Documentation about "push.default=upstream" is confusing Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 11:06:00 -0800 Message-ID: References: <20140209163157.GA7652@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Ingo Rohloff X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon Feb 10 20:06:24 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WCwBT-0007qx-CA for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 20:06:23 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752575AbaBJTGS (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:06:18 -0500 Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com ([208.72.237.35]:64040 "EHLO smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752474AbaBJTGR (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:06:17 -0500 Received: from smtp.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A99106B19D; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:06:16 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; s=sasl; bh=7SSJFqRoB9ayKjD59TkX2+EUQx8=; b=jj753a POQINgIbY4+Gvk3W6DE8qxxNH3HiEs95q/DfDo6Gnis2i0ttl03sR16F6PH3QojE cVvHeau/Vk/gPJelljGUy7SecYuIE1bQpl5btL0Oxw28gxNPKLOCcyZfDKZWMWVT deOlnP03VvSywsdc8WabJouku6stM5ahWOuBE= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=pobox.com; h=from:to:cc :subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type; q=dns; s=sasl; b=h545FHOQiKVn8FuSpJ5soXZoTn7rW/FD 8SNF4oJEEoFVZ53HqYVZ92eftMaLGK1off9S2B4Ejf2kh5yz4ddFpawtDwiF1V4S 2Jq/OYgC9uIlRAbix3NhsR1jIRWElil8usqBNzZDnph3JuTIXMhFVnHVR6FNB2Z+ xNQGXcmL8dM= Received: from b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4AC326B19C; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:06:16 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [72.14.226.9]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by b-sasl-quonix.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 975336B197; Mon, 10 Feb 2014 14:06:14 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20140209163157.GA7652@localhost> (Ingo Rohloff's message of "Sun, 9 Feb 2014 17:31:57 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.3 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 69A8140E-9286-11E3-BB60-1B26802839F8-77302942!b-pb-sasl-quonix.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Ingo Rohloff writes: > To handle that I setup several remote tracking branches called: > repo1_master (tracks repo1/master) > repo2_master (tracks repo2/master) > reap3_master (tracks repo3/master) > > Now without "push.default=upstream" I would have to either always explicitly > do something like: > git push repo1 repo1_master:master > git push repo2 repo2_master:master If you think about your interaction with people who are only looking at "repo1" alone, you _are_ using a centralized workflow. You are not the only one who update their 'master'; other people push there to update that 'master' and you pull it in to keep you up to date and further build your changes on top. Such an interaction with other people by using repo1 as the shared meeting point is well served by the push-to-upstream mechanism, and that kind of interaction is called "centralized workflow". The illustration from you is running one centralized workflow with each of the three repositories. The de-centralized workflow the message hints (but does not talk about) is different. It is not uncommon to pull from one place and then to push the result out to your own publishing branch (e.g. clone from anna, fetch to keep up to date with her, work on it, publish to your repository to tell her to fetch from you), and push-to-upstream is not very well suited for that topology. You may clone her "for-bob" branch, but you do not push it back to her repository to update her "for-bob" branch.