From: Ramkumar Ramachandra <artagnon@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 07 Feb 2013 19:37:04 GMT
Subject: Re: Proposal: branch.<name>.remotepush
Message-ID: <CALkWK0=53riU3xKbKkyAVS8--9VoAU5P6h88MQ9-geW=H5+a-w@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <5113E849.8000602@elegosoft.com>

There's a reason why remote.<name>.pushurl feels wrong.  If one remote
has a different push from pull, there should be something
corresponding to refs/remotes/* for push (and the equivalent of fetch
for updating it).  Second, I can't even diff between a branch on my
push URL and a local branch: the [ahead 1, behind 1] in status output
really doesn't make sense if the repository you're pushing to is
different from the one you're pulling from.  In contrast, if you take
what I proposed, refs/remotes/{upstream, mine}/* already exist, and
it's easy to diff them with the corresponding local branch.

And yes, a regular `git push origin refs/for/master` is just retarded.
 I don't personally use Gerrit, but the people who do should not have
to suffer.