From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS53758 23.128.96.0/24 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.4 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_PASS, SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 081F71F45A for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 08:39:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1728447AbgDUIi2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Apr 2020 04:38:28 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:50820 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-FAIL-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726018AbgDUIi1 (ORCPT ); Tue, 21 Apr 2020 04:38:27 -0400 Received: from mail-pg1-x543.google.com (mail-pg1-x543.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::543]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4DD0EC061A0F for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 01:38:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-pg1-x543.google.com with SMTP id g6so6440759pgs.9 for ; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 01:38:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=WYOOvMlpHespKeLiG0XNh25U9modOcLjAD/oaRKq0S0=; b=fMXoPki0IU8TvokM6lD5EKl7sFrEtIrxVt1OXZ0BkbmV0+4IJLFXuUjBj3exzX7YpW HGg14AWJCbuJ5IVFwiX52VoZ0sqJ6AJlwFMM8hntJU42mXwMqX87TQvjs3XJBtPnhSL/ xaNdhYdWVOdGlLa18uuAOnDTbAGmA33Oe5S6xVu7F15RIMrL9wVYArwD2U6Jk2b4OY5c 1Vgr9QW1OoIxvq6ocfKJvVYiE8E+6WcNlZ4MbvoW+mpOZQyyAUHDfUB6Wpum4FiCEmlX wRoaTNGlfwYEYx2mrLn14hoHKp/M9ElZ7+dT7JhLRmJVBzrh9g6wS3HGZ3p60k7UicNi S8ZA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=WYOOvMlpHespKeLiG0XNh25U9modOcLjAD/oaRKq0S0=; b=PWqeoyG69vuT3xLUybZfn4uNT98YtlpQfk1xqF+PbuH2tLdwB5BIEaGhOsShHzAWts SsuxVO/hcpzvy44HsutkgE9KOUj2xgeSRazrIoQbB6/w1j/FKc2hFaNDCjdvfU1471NZ qZtsBcR6aHZ6iMnL7sT/+dlh+kYL0u8uU94GddfujozG1/u7GwCnC5i1roBnTrqkTuYo DwCogu1z7h31AQKXzwJYS3fgW5n0mrKnx5DhDsaSLfEMjBqDxj3Ya4OLSf/qlV14osa8 qMLy7uQVtD3eoz9GL9Ho+ysi9OjkFx+FOd+ue4f13VJZ+s/N95MMVh1fo+3RGO/Evtqq cU6g== X-Gm-Message-State: AGi0PuYjNcfdI07w1sRlUUixHKsokrzeOHfgfW6UCr32CUIktQnJNm1+ 9gVw6kCCtuiBbD+DfiOy3wEiiPM4y1U= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APiQypJiJsnYY9s/J5Q1UomN292KknwMwfemsZZHhcMhEDsGtLrhisFSxsnw32nSmrmmKtzZ58S4xQ== X-Received: by 2002:a62:864d:: with SMTP id x74mr20590501pfd.158.1587458306540; Tue, 21 Apr 2020 01:38:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from konoha ([103.37.201.175]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 185sm1834731pfv.9.2020.04.21.01.38.24 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 21 Apr 2020 01:38:25 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2020 14:08:20 +0530 From: Shourya Shukla To: Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] gitfaq: append the 'Common Issues' section Message-ID: <20200421083820.GB11800@konoha> References: <20200413140918.4778-1-shouryashukla.oo@gmail.com> <20200413140918.4778-2-shouryashukla.oo@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On 20/04 05:57, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Shourya Shukla writes: > >+ 2. One might want to have two different remotes for > >+ fetching and pushing; this generally happens in case > >+ of triangular workflows. In this case, it is > >+ advisable to create a separate remote just for > >+ fetching/pushing. > > Yes, by definition, triangular is about fetching from somebody else > and publishing to your own place for others to fetch, so you'd need > two remotes, as you are not talking with a single repository. > > But I find your phrasing quite confusing. I understand. My words turn out to be very ambiguous sometimes. I meant creating a separate remote for fetch and separate one for push. Apologies for the confusion. > "advisable to have two remotes, one for fetching and the other for > pushing" would probably be a lot more correct. > > And I can understand why you did not write so, and instead ended up > with your version. In order to reach the goal of having two (one > for push and one for fetch), you would "create a separate remote" as > you are likely to already have one for one direction (in other > words, you didn't want to say "advisable to create two remotes"). > > You wrote "create a separate remote just for fetching/pushing" and > made the direction of the new one vague, because you do not know if > that existing one is for fetching or pushing, > > But I suspect that all of the above would not be as clear to those > who need their questions answered as to somebody like me who knows > what you want to say already. And you do not want to explain things > in a way that only is understood by experts. How about rephrasing > the above more like so? > > 2. One may want to fetch from one repository and push to > anther repository---this is often called a "triangular" > workflow. As you'd probably have one remote that you use > for fetching already created when you cloned the project, > you would want to create a separate remote to record the URL > you push to. Yep. I will add this. This reads out much better. > >+ But, another way can be to change > >+ the push url using the `--push` option in the `git > >+ set-url` command. > > Do not recommend this when you describe a triangular workflow; it is > confusing to readers. Keeping separate fetch and push URLs for a > single remote is not triangular. I thought it would be OK to describe a maybe *unorthodox* way to do this. I will remove it in the next version. > Describe it separately as a different use case, e.g. > > 3. You may want to push to a repository over a network > protocol different from the one you use to fetch from the > repository. Perhaps you want unauthenticated https:// URL > for fetching from, and use ssh:// URL when you push to, the > same remote. In such a case, ... That sounds quite better. I will incorporate this. Thank you so much for such a detailed review! :) Regards, Shourya Shukla