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

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jun 3, 2016, 15:46 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqd1nyqnr6.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <9FB65CA220F84B6B882B75435DDA3D65@PhilipOakley>

"Philip Oakley" <philipoakley@iee.org> writes:

Show 5 quoted lines

> That said, trying to find a good name for that 'third place' is not easy. 
> It's neither upstream, nor downstream (for Junio - the maintainer special 
> case - git.git would be his downstream). The me/git repo is like a 
> ferryman's landing across the other side of the river flow, a safe harbour 
> if you will.

You raise a good point here.

To me, the git.git public repository that everybody pulls from is just like me/git for everybody else. It is a place where you publish your work. I think the @{push} notation during its design phase was once called @{publish} instead.

A "downstream" that is the opposite of "upstream" is not something you would configure and control. They are those who call you "upstream". You know and actively configure who your "upstream" is and pull from there. You do not have direct control who are the people who are pulling from you.

So in that sense, "downstream" exists as a concept that is just as valid as "upstream", but unlike "upstream", "downstream" does not manifest itself as something you explicitly tell Git about, either from the command line, in the remotes definition, or in the configuration files.