From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN,FREEMAIL_FROM, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90318C47080 for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 23:53:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F8A461351 for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 23:53:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S235227AbhFAXyu (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jun 2021 19:54:50 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:39884 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234766AbhFAXyu (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Jun 2021 19:54:50 -0400 Received: from mail-ot1-x32d.google.com (mail-ot1-x32d.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::32d]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63A88C061574 for ; Tue, 1 Jun 2021 16:53:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ot1-x32d.google.com with SMTP id r26-20020a056830121ab02902a5ff1c9b81so891908otp.11 for ; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 16:53:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=eCmeDBFFkBS5JSOs0E290PsCd8CkoCOlN4LfsXC/f4k=; b=rO9qxl2ptyCGK7P4nynTeyZqwZsu2RY+ICIVV5+ZP8hoDJACuQq5ly8MkmXUzdTqKa 2W7kADQSQYx9QXSA/ThF8d+O+lhbJLo2rCn8mEjS3ut5wsRK+/yczGg/ih4Sl1yeW96s 7/NckxWtVnANQfWgSjfXA8MllsXlBkdin/SHx1gTIvPB8MgLFxBnO7tvdrxNdp41I5Dw n+lNS7hMw5cnfEwBJRFKMDWUmMLo4TaI8BGcxIk3wOK8M7ishn/vb0s3A0v2pieghtUD MHXvIRYM6S5nBhui/mdgVuGeqe4ObxKA3v32xvwy5gal2Vtil1qG8ehPGqnv9AdJWWLj ctbQ== 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:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=eCmeDBFFkBS5JSOs0E290PsCd8CkoCOlN4LfsXC/f4k=; b=Ot8Wf6mPZf4hq9T+1IETW84QDU8EdwhGt76JFDPAS1UkJWjAHgvGGdYX2ObCx5Kdin wU4ivvLBfATT5IMF1QlR8SfNHHZnxf6BopzTETe+tBiJuub55ZPYIrQirqgrG+Nga00o g+M/cnvnglFv6L9pODU8rlu6Tw2crD901/9O9uudOlOI8aRcTSxs9UIkYR2HLmG3+Qpf g+GbHFk2sGB5yPoGIqagmuWjtzTgFRg7Z9xaBNfqMAFeRn8XI7Le3T1nytUKENTmksgE rW2X65jDSXg3uLyNLRgIU4ICJvLs5jFc+zvVsYs52ql8ExFiq5lXnVST7gEwcc6NMfKt W6Zw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532bMtn1qPzWkyreOFoBwjUB3q6SbmarpP01QL39gk0IEL9VOvck IU7UDLmM3+Ab725rNxzQMsk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyOJ/JbQIvpc0puq6ETAXqTmvqrGAdA7OyYuCrUBD20B0vptLp2D+Rhin5++IbVpD39ruSokw== X-Received: by 2002:a9d:738b:: with SMTP id j11mr3611193otk.228.1622591586756; Tue, 01 Jun 2021 16:53:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (fixed-187-190-78-172.totalplay.net. [187.190.78.172]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r85sm1594139oor.38.2021.06.01.16.53.05 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 01 Jun 2021 16:53:06 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 01 Jun 2021 18:53:04 -0500 From: Felipe Contreras To: Philip Oakley , Felipe Contreras , Junio C Hamano Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Elijah Newren , Mathias Kunter , =?UTF-8?B?w4Z2YXIgQXJuZmrDtnLDsCBCamFybWFzb24=?= , Ramkumar Ramachandra , Jeff King , =?UTF-8?B?UmVuw6kgU2NoYXJmZQ==?= , Matthieu Moy Message-ID: <60b6c860e4a4e_40442081d@natae.notmuch> In-Reply-To: <819f7ed4-ef38-32d4-2a64-a38ac37a5736@iee.email> References: <20210529071115.1908310-1-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <20210529071115.1908310-7-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <60b49a3ae829b_24d28208fd@natae.notmuch> <60b62420858c4_e409520828@natae.notmuch> <60b661d5ee7cc_3c4208c1@natae.notmuch> <819f7ed4-ef38-32d4-2a64-a38ac37a5736@iee.email> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 6/6] doc: push: explain default=simple correctly Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Philip Oakley wrote: > On 01/06/2021 17:35, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > Philip Oakley wrote: > >> On 01/06/2021 13:12, Felipe Contreras wrote: > >>> So it's more like: > >>> > >>> centralized = ~decentralized > >>> triangular = ~two-way > >>> > >>> A centralized workflow consists of a single repository where branches > >>> are typically two-way, but not necessarily. > >>> > >>> A decentralized workflow consists of multiple repositories where > >>> branches are typically triangular, but not necessarily. > >>> > >>> So the triangularity is per branch, not per repository, and same_repo > >>> means a two-way branch, could be a centralized or decentralized > >>> workflow. > >> My personal viewpoint is that triangular flow happens when you cannot > >> push to the repo you consider as upstream. > > It's not about permissions. Even if I had permissions to push to git.git, > > I wouldn't do so. I do have permission to push to some public projects, but I > > instead send patches/pull requests like everyone else. > > I had it that if you don't have permissions then you definitely need to > use a Triangular flow. Hence how I was presenting the view. If you don't have permissions you have no option but a triangular flow. If you are in a triangular flow that doesn't necessarily mean you don't have permissions. > >> A thought did come to mind that a Git serve/repo (typically bare) should > >> be able to offer a 'refs/users/*' space (c.f. refs/remotes used by > >> individual users) that allows a type of 'centralised' operation (almost > >> as if all the users used a common alternates repo). Users could only > >> push to their own /user refs, but could pull from the main refs/heads, > >> and their own refs/users/ space. > >> > >> This would give flexibility to smaller corporate central operations to > >> offer 'triangular flow' where each dev would feel like they have their > >> own 'push' repo, when in reality it's really personalised branches. As > >> usual the authentication of user names being handed off elsewhere;-). It > >> could avoid some of the --alternate management aspects. > >> > >> It's a thought.. > > Yeah, and interesting thought. But it demonstrates what I said above: > > you can have a central repository, and yet have triangular branches: > > I see triangular being about repos, rather than branches. If you have a feature-1 branch that fetches from origin, rebases onto origin/master, but pushes to origin/feature-1... Does that qualify as triangular? -- Felipe Contreras