Ben Boeckel [off-list ref] writes:
I searched the docs (including `Documentation/gitworkflows.txt`), but
didn't see anywhere to describe the fork-based workflow common on forges
(such as GitHub and GitLab) where this felt "at home".
Before you came, many users have used Git with these forges, so it
might be just the matter of correct terminology to use to find what
to read about. Does the keyword "triangular workflow" find what may
help your way of working?
On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 18:04:08 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Ben Boeckel [off-list ref] writes:
quoted
I searched the docs (including `Documentation/gitworkflows.txt`), but
didn't see anywhere to describe the fork-based workflow common on forges
(such as GitHub and GitLab) where this felt "at home".
Before you came, many users have used Git with these forges, so it
might be just the matter of correct terminology to use to find what
to read about. Does the keyword "triangular workflow" find what may
help your way of working?
Oh, I'm familiar with it, I just didn't see a place which discussed it
in the docs with respect to it as a *workflow*. The existing references
are about the `@{push}`…selector (is there a name for these `@{}`
suffixes as a collection?) and a note under "Future Work" in
partial-clone. Neither of these seemed like relevant places to discuss
how to set up remotes and tracking branches for the triangular workflow.
I would expect it to be discussed in `gitworkflows.txt`, but I think
such an addition is worthy of its own patchset rather than tacking it
onto this.
Thanks,
--Ben