From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Adding push configuration to .git/config Date: Thu, 22 Nov 2007 00:28:49 -0800 Message-ID: <7v8x4q8z0e.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20071121105517.GA11875@denkbrett.schottelius.org> <7vabp79hjt.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <47453551.3060502@op5.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Steffen Prohaska , Nico -telmich- Schottelius , git@vger.kernel.org To: Andreas Ericsson X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Nov 22 09:29:22 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Iv7Qx-0006Dn-FJ for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 22 Nov 2007 09:29:15 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751604AbXKVI25 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Nov 2007 03:28:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751494AbXKVI25 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Nov 2007 03:28:57 -0500 Received: from sceptre.pobox.com ([207.106.133.20]:37878 "EHLO sceptre.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751403AbXKVI24 (ORCPT ); Thu, 22 Nov 2007 03:28:56 -0500 Received: from sceptre (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by sceptre.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A86E2FA; Thu, 22 Nov 2007 03:29:17 -0500 (EST) Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by sceptre.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B0D096A9B; Thu, 22 Nov 2007 03:29:12 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <47453551.3060502@op5.se> (Andreas Ericsson's message of "Thu, 22 Nov 2007 08:52:49 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Andreas Ericsson writes: > Steffen Prohaska wrote: >> >> On Nov 22, 2007, at 2:48 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> ... >>> If we were to do this, it might also make sense to rename the >>> word 'origin' we use for the default remote name to 'default' or >>> something. People with shared repository workflow would fetch >>> from one repository and push back to the same repository, so the >>> distinction would not matter, but for others who need something >>> like you suggest, the default repository for fetching and >>> pushing are different, and while you may still consider where >>> you fetch from your 'origin', where you push into is not your >>> 'origin' anymore. >> >> I like this idea. > > I don't. It's troublesome enough to try to teach the finer points > of git to my co-workers without different defaults between versions. I don't like the s/origin/default/ part either, which was the reason I said "it might". That would be what I would have done if I were doing git from scratch right now.