On Mon, Sep 15, 2025, at 5:48 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote:

"Julia Evans" [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

I'm not comfortable with calling this a "triangular workflow" since

But it has been for a long time known as a "triangular workflow"
already, so it is not like you are in your documentation update
inventing the terminology.  You do not have to feel unconfortable.

I'm not sure what you mean by that: according to `git grep` the term
"triangular" is used only once in the Git documentation, somewhere
in the middle of the `gitrevisions` man page. There are also a couple
of mentions in the release notes.

It seems like the term "triangular workflow" has been used quite a bit on
this mailing list but it's important to differentiate between terms that are
commonly used internally in the Git developer community and terms
which are actually used in the Git documentation and understood by
users.

And this "each developer may internally use many branches, but at
the public meeting points they share small number of branches (or
just one) that integrate their work" is the most basic form of
triangular workflow.

If you want to exclude all the advanced forms, without specifically
singling out the triangular workflow, you can say "if you are not
using the centralized workflow, and pushing to somewhere other than
where you are fetching from, then do this..." and it would work
fine, I guess.