Re: Triangular workflow

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Jan 14, 2026, 21:01 UTC
Message-ID: <20260114210158.GA1008851@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20260114174845.61215-1-haraldnordgren@gmail.com>

On Wed, Jan 14, 2026 at 06:48:45PM +0100, Harald Nordgren wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> > Sure, but:
> > 
> >   1. It is a lot shorter to type @{push}. ;)
> > 
> >   2. Using @{push} works everywhere, even on my non-triangular repos,
> >      because it takes into account the push configuration. So it's a
> >      much nicer muscle-memory to acquire.
> 
> Makes sense, I’m all out of arguments here 😅 Please don’t take this the
> wrong way, but it reminds me of this XKCD: https://xkcd.com/1172/

Perhaps if the person in that comic was the one who implemented @{push} in the first place. ;)

That said, I really don't think my use case is exotic. I've set up "git push" in the only way that makes sense for my triangular setup. I just don't happen to use it that often, and I don't want to be reminded me unnecessarily of the relationship between each branch and its push destination.

> As long as this is turned on by default then I’m mostly happy. Maybe JCH
> and others can weigh in on if this needs to be this configurable or always
> on.

IMHO not making it configurable is a show-stopper, because without that it leaves people who don't like the new behavior with no escape hatch.

As to the default for that config option, I don't have a strong opinion. I'd lean towards "off", as I do not find the feature that compelling myself, and I don't recall ever hearing of it as a pain point for other Git users. But I also recognize that's based on vague vibes, and I think users are generally not very savvy about setting up triangular workflows in the first place.

-Peff