From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Dmitry Potapov Subject: Re: push.default: current vs upstream Date: Fri, 6 Apr 2012 23:38:46 +0400 Message-ID: References: <7vd37wv77j.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20120329095236.GA11911@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vbonfqezs.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20120329221154.GA1413@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vfwcqq2dw.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20120330071358.GB30656@sigill.intra.peff.net> <7vty15ltuo.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20120405131301.GB10293@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Cc: Matthieu Moy , Jeff King , Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: demerphq X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Apr 06 21:39:10 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SGF01-0001Im-1F for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 21:39:09 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757611Ab2DFTjE (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Apr 2012 15:39:04 -0400 Received: from mail-pz0-f52.google.com ([209.85.210.52]:46571 "EHLO mail-pz0-f52.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755017Ab2DFTjD (ORCPT ); Fri, 6 Apr 2012 15:39:03 -0400 Received: by dake40 with SMTP id e40so3061634dak.11 for ; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 12:39:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=GYMSpK3foiEuCxHtXcOEuPGeZZl2VT3ZYZvwP7Kd56U=; b=LxnwEBMtokHW+cjtj5/ZgwOvD4S6gU3Y2Zjh5MPWLaek+oAgiP/MXB2ReQu4Mpjy74 18xkpsyf+cSyKypQ/hQ0H/YahirqCfOs/3OiHTqolxPoguVJfMaPxjkM5qesbYmkxoLw hrJsqdq9EdzFOtjnS4imdlfdR7f9g6h7LpA7lVsIvLIkUx8VVMTNpy5Ivtp4nssJpArN 2BHPSL4NF/+M20CFmDesrDrohEtnycqxx1UScFwRtHkbpiAS67PBDc83vo7YhG/T6aJ+ LEmuozO18anLRYPoVCWsE5issiuvYkMMGCht/NQi18mf6Y7Eb32yozK1IcQ1MUxwe2fk FlRg== Received: by 10.68.197.164 with SMTP id iv4mr18258249pbc.11.1333741126876; Fri, 06 Apr 2012 12:38:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.143.66.9 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Apr 2012 12:38:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 10:48 PM, demerphq wrote: > On 6 April 2012 20:03, Dmitry Potapov wrote: >> On Fri, Apr 6, 2012 at 5:36 PM, demerphq wrote: >>> On 6 April 2012 13:38, Dmitry Potapov wrote: >>>> Seriously, why do you care about beginners who use a centralized workflow >>>> and not beginners who have to use with existing projects that use more or >>>> less distributed workflow, >>> >>> Because the former are unlikely to be self-selected users of git and >>> instead are likely to be forced to use git because their $work has >>> dictated it to be so. >> >> Any decision is made by people. On its own, $work does not dictate what >> VCS or what workflow should be used. There are many ways for those who >> are in charge to screw up things. And a centralized workflow is not very >> scalable and many bad practices associated with it. While it is not easy >> to to convert a CVS/SVN repository to git that alone does not bring most >> of git advantages, because those advantages come from the workflow. > > Pretty well every project that uses git has a "canonical upstream > repository". Including for instance this one. Which basically means at > some point there is a centralized master repo. It is either owned by > someone like Linus or Junio, or it is owned by a company. Companies > tend to like to know that their valuable data is properly backed up, > and etc. This basically means central repos are inevitable. And git > works just fine like that thank you very much. It seems you confuse a centralized workflow with existence of an official (central) repository. It is not same... Dmitry