Re: [RFC/PATCH] Triangular Workflow UI improvement: Documentation

>> Like PUSH_REMOTE, the remote where we fetch can be called FETCH_REMOTE. 
>> e.g. That’s clear to say "I fetch from fetch_remote". 
>> 
>> Do you agree?
> 
> That is technically correct, but to illustrate the overall flow, I'd
> rather avoid naming the repositories in terms of git commands. If you do
> so, you will probably end up with tautological explanations like this
> later in the text: "FETCH_REMOTE is the remote from where you fetch,
> PUSH_REMOTE is the remote to which you push, and LOCAL is local".
> 
> I suggested PUBLIC-FORK earlier, and didn't get any feedback on it. I
> think it translates the intent better than PUSH_REMOTE. An alternative
> would be PUBLISH (= the repository you use to publish your changes so
> that the maintainer can pick them).