Re: Separate default push/pull?

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Feb 12, 2010, 01:05 UTC
Message-ID: <20100212010549.GA23303@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <7veikrl1m1.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 04:49:26PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> 
> > I think what he would need is a "push.defaultRemote" config option,
> > which universally overrides branch.*.remote for pushing.
> 
> Or "branch.*.pushremote".

That doesn't address my point 2, which is needing to set it up for every branch.

> But does it really make sense to get changes from one place and send
> changes to somewhere completely unrelated?

It depends on your workflow. For git.git, your kernel.org repository is my "origin", but I publish my state to a mirror for backup purposes (and I don't publish for others to view, but I could very well do that, too). I type "git push peff.net" and that is not too much trouble. Typing just "git push" would be slightly more convenient, though.

In a distributed setup, I don't think it is that uncommon to not want to push to the place you pull from. You are generally pulling and building on somebody else's work, so if there is no central repo, you will be pushing to somewhere that is not where you pulled it.

-Peff