Re: [PATCH 0/4] Support triangular workflows

2013-03-18 Thread Marc Branchaud
On 13-03-18 10:25 AM, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 06:46:11PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > >> I've put off implementing remote.default corresponding to >> remote.pushdefault, as Jeff suggested in [1], because it's currently >> not an itch; apart from the obvious symmetry, I d

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Support triangular workflows

2013-03-18 Thread Jeff King
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 07:58:23PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > Jeff King wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 06:46:11PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > >> Documentation/config.txt | 23 --- > >> builtin/push.c | 2 +- > >> remote.c | 60 > >

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Support triangular workflows

2013-03-18 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 06:46:11PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: >> Documentation/config.txt | 23 --- >> builtin/push.c | 2 +- >> remote.c | 60 >> +++- >> remote.h |

Re: [PATCH 0/4] Support triangular workflows

2013-03-18 Thread Jeff King
On Mon, Mar 18, 2013 at 06:46:11PM +0530, Ramkumar Ramachandra wrote: > I've put off implementing remote.default corresponding to > remote.pushdefault, as Jeff suggested in [1], because it's currently > not an itch; apart from the obvious symmetry, I don't know what > purpose it serves: why would

[PATCH 0/4] Support triangular workflows

2013-03-18 Thread Ramkumar Ramachandra
Hi, This series follows up a previous discussion with Junio and Jeff [1]. It attempts to support the triangular workflow, where the remote you're fetching from is not the same as the remote you're pushing to. `remote..pushurl` has already been discussed, and deemed as a poor solution to the proble