>On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 20:12:37 +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Jan Hudec <bulb@xxxxxx> writes:
>>
>> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 18:10:10 +0100, Benoit Sigoure wrote:
>> >> On Nov 26, 2007, at 5:46 PM, Andy Parkins wrote:
>> >> While we're discussing bad names, as someone already pointed out, I
agree
>> >> it's sad that "git push" is almost always understood as being the
opposite
>> >> of "git pull".
>> >
>> > Well, it is an oposite of pull. Compared to it, it is limited in that
it will
>> > not do a merge and on the other hand extended to *also* be an oposite
of
>> > fetch, but still oposite of pull is push.
>>
>> With the same reasoning the opposite of a duck is a lobster, since a
>> lobster has not only fewer wings, but also more legs.
>
>No.
>
>The basic pull/push actions are:
>
>git pull: Bring the remote ref value here.
>git push: Put the local ref value there.
>
>Are those not oposites?
>
>Than each command has it's different features on top of this -- pull
>merges
>and push can push multiple refs -- but in the basic operation they are
>oposites.
In the case remote branches are used push and pull are not exactly
opposite. Pull uses the remote branch and push does not.
.
LOCAL REPO . REMOTE REPO
.............................................................
a_local_branch ------------ push ------------->a_local_branch
^ . |
| . |
| . |
merge . |
| . |
| . |
a_remote_branch <----------fetch ---------------------
.
Cheers,
Michael
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
