From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: Separate default remotes for pulling and pushing Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 16:20:03 -0400 Message-ID: <20110510202003.GF14456@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1FDDE878-C81A-4318-836B-7F8BED51A981@gmail.com> <20110509081708.GA5871@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7viptjq0ua.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20110509220459.GA3719@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , Sverre Rabbelier , David Lee , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jay Soffian X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue May 10 22:20:18 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QJtPi-0003Pc-O5 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 10 May 2011 22:20:15 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752525Ab1EJUUH (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 May 2011 16:20:07 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:54745 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751450Ab1EJUUH (ORCPT ); Tue, 10 May 2011 16:20:07 -0400 Received: (qmail 25780 invoked by uid 107); 10 May 2011 20:22:02 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Tue, 10 May 2011 16:22:02 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 10 May 2011 16:20:03 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 08:47:53AM -0400, Jay Soffian wrote: > On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Jeff King wrote: > > I think it is important to note that calling them both "origin" is > > definitely the wrong thing. The proposal is instead that "git push" > > without a remote would default to something besides "origin". For people > > who publish multiple places, it might even make sense for it to be an > > iterative push to each place. > > While developing in a particular repo, I constantly have to push to > two compile machines. I just dropped a Makefile into the top of my > working tree: > > all: push > amend: > git amend -a > git --no-pager diff @{1} > make push > push: > make -j 2 mac win > mac: > git push mac > win: > git push win Yeah, I have scripts to help with that sort of thing now. But that is often an unsatisfactory solution, because either: 1. Your Makefile is not version-controlled. 2. Your are polluting the project history with stuff specific to your workflow. I would not get very far proposing that git.git's Makefile contain such a thing. :) That's how Junio ended up with his "Meta" directory (and I have one, too, but with drastically different things in it). -Peff