From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Tue, 10 May 2011 20:20:03 GMT
Subject: Re: Separate default remotes for pulling and pushing
Message-ID: <20110510202003.GF14456@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <BANLkTimUn9e=5CfDcvQdgNYY4_pqbi8peQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 08:47:53AM -0400, Jay Soffian wrote:

> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 6:04 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> 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