Re: [PATCH 0/1] Improve automatic setup of tracking for new branches

[Ben Boeckel <mathstuf@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Jul 30, 2021 at 09:35:39 -0400, Philippe Blain wrote:
> I'm in favor of a change like the one you propose, thanks for working on this!

Thanks :) . Nice to know it'll be of use for others.

> The 'triangular' aka 'forking' workflow is, as you discovered, only explicitely
> mentioned in the description of '@{push}' [1]. 'gitworkflows(5)' is mostly about
> how the workflow used by the Git projet itself (from the description):
> 
>      This document attempts to write down and motivate some of the workflow
>      elements used for git.git itself.

Ah, I missed that.

> Le 2021-07-28 à 22:01, Ben Boeckel a écrit :
> > v1 -> v2:
> >    - removed `branch.defaultPushRemote` (`remote.pushDefault` covers this
> >      case already)
> >    - improved the commit message with more background and an expanation
> >      of the intended uses
> > 
> 
> Small nit: usually when sending a second version of a patch, you would use
> the '-v2' argument to 'git format-patch' so that the patch and cover letter
> is prefixed [PATCH v2].

Yes, I realized that I had forgotten the `--reroll-count=` argument when
making this patch (I suppose a way to store the Cc list for a topic
somewhere would be nice so I didn't lean so heavily on shell history
would help this).

FWIW, my main gripe with the email-based workflow is the lack of
coordinated metadata (LWN has numerous comments by me about my views if
you're curious, but I should really formalize them into blog posts). But
when in Rome :) .

Thanks,

--Ben