Re: Proposal: branch.<name>.remotepush

Michael J Gruber [off-list ref] writes:

As for the triangle remote, I really think we should clean up the
situation regarding push, pushurlinsteadof and the various different and
inconclusive output formats of "git remote" (with or without "-v", with
or without a remote name) first, before introducing yet another way to
twist things around. "git push downstream" does not hurt any kittens
(while git remote ouput does, somehwat).

As people tend to fetch more often than they push if they are
working on a real project where the others as a whole will be far
more productive than any single individual, I agree that keeping
"git fetch" (or "git pull") lazy by having "origin" point at where
they fetch from and be a bit more explicit in "git push" would
actually make sense.