git@vger.kernel.org mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Matthieu Moy <git@matthieu-moy.fr>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, matthieu.moy@univ-lyon1.fr,
	corentin.bompard@etu.univ-lyon1.fr,
	nathan.berbezier@etu.univ-lyon1.fr,
	pablo.chabanne@etu.univ-lyon1.fr
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pull, fetch: add --set-upstream option
Date: Wed, 14 Aug 2019 10:38:28 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <xmqqlfvv6417.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20190814134629.21096-1-git@matthieu-moy.fr> (Matthieu Moy's message of "Wed, 14 Aug 2019 15:46:29 +0200")

Matthieu Moy <git@matthieu-moy.fr> writes:

> From: Corentin BOMPARD <corentin.bompard@etu.univ-lyon1.fr>
>
> Add the --set-upstream option to git pull/fetch
> which lets the user set the upstream configuration
> (branch.<current-branch-name>.merge and
> branch.<current-branch-name>.remote) for the current branch.
>
> A typical use-case is:
>
>     git clone http://example.com/my-public-fork
>     git remote add main http://example.com/project-main-repo
>     git pull --set-upstream main master
>
> or, instead of the last line:
>
>     git fetch --set-upstream main master
>     git merge # or git rebase
>
> This functionality is analog to push --set-upstream.

I was writing a one-paragraph summary for this topic, for the
"What's cooking" report, and here is what I have:

 "git fetch" learned "--set-upstream" option to help those who first
 clone from a forked repository they intend to push to, add the true
 upstream via "git remote add" and then "git fetch" from it.

After describing it like so, I cannot shake the feeling that the
workflow this intends to support feels somewhat backwards and
suboptimal.

 - Unless you rely on server-side "fork" like GitHub does, you would
   first clone from the upstream, and then push to your "fork".  The
   flow whose first step is to clone from your "fork", not from the
   true upstream, feels backwards (cloning from upstream then adding
   your fork as a secondary may be more natural, without need for
   the complexity of --set-upstream to pull/fetch/push, no?).

 - The second step adds the true upstream using "git remote", and at
   that point, in your mind you are quite clear that you want to
   pull from there (and push to your own fork).  Not having the "I
   am adding this new remote; from now on, it is my upstream"
   feature at this step, and instead having to say that with your
   first "git pull", feels backwards.  If this feature were instead
   added to "git remote", then the last step in your example does
   not even have to say "main" (and no need for this new option),
   does it?


  parent reply	other threads:[~2019-08-14 17:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
     [not found] <d21d42228425408298da9e99b5877ac9@BPMBX2013-01.univ-lyon1.fr>
2019-04-04 15:43 ` [PATCH] [WIP/RFC] add git pull and git fetch --set-upstream Matthieu Moy
2019-04-09 12:52   ` Corentin BOMPARD
2019-04-17 16:01     ` Corentin BOMPARD
2019-04-18  1:35       ` Junio C Hamano
2019-04-19 16:00         ` Corentin BOMPARD
2019-04-19 18:42           ` Corentin BOMPARD
     [not found]           ` <f601baa2c2a04ddea4ba32ab25d0dd21@BPMBX2013-01.univ-lyon1.fr>
2019-04-22 10:38             ` Matthieu Moy
2019-08-14 13:46               ` [PATCH] pull, fetch: add --set-upstream option Matthieu Moy
2019-08-14 17:14                 ` Pratyush Yadav
2019-08-19  9:08                   ` Matthieu Moy
2019-08-19  9:11                     ` [PATCH v2] " Matthieu Moy
2019-08-14 17:38                 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2019-08-19  9:07                   ` [PATCH] " Matthieu Moy
2019-08-19 20:04                     ` Junio C Hamano
2019-08-20  8:09                       ` Matthieu Moy
     [not found]       ` <36559daca9d84f7a91933add734020cd@BPMBX2013-01.univ-lyon1.fr>
2019-04-18  9:51         ` [PATCH] [WIP/RFC] add git pull and git fetch --set-upstream Matthieu Moy
2019-04-19  4:46           ` Junio C Hamano
     [not found]           ` <04f23ebf83bd4aff90ee9ca88cec984e@BPMBX2013-01.univ-lyon1.fr>
2019-04-19  9:44             ` Matthieu Moy
     [not found]     ` <3d2ba75520b74c2e9e8251c41d6632ba@BPMBX2013-01.univ-lyon1.fr>
2019-04-18  9:56       ` Matthieu Moy

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=xmqqlfvv6417.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com \
    --to=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=corentin.bompard@etu.univ-lyon1.fr \
    --cc=git@matthieu-moy.fr \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matthieu.moy@univ-lyon1.fr \
    --cc=nathan.berbezier@etu.univ-lyon1.fr \
    --cc=pablo.chabanne@etu.univ-lyon1.fr \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://80x24.org/mirrors/git.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).