On Tue, Jun 16, 2009 at 8:17 PM, Antony Blakey <antony.bla...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > On 17/06/2009, at 10:37 AM, Mark Volkmann wrote: > > > I think you've got that backwards. A "git push" is how I would ask > > the remote repo to accept my changes. A "git pull" says I want to > > update my local repo with changes someone made in the remote repo. > > No, you can send a *request* to Rich, via GitHub, to pull from your > repository. That's what a git pull *request* is - it's a request for > someone else to git pull. A 'git pull' is, as you say, the command to > pull commits into your repository and apply them, but that's not what > Rich is talking about here. > > A common GitHub workflow is to fork someone's repository, clone your > fork, push your changes to your GitHub fork, and then send a pull > request to the owner of the 'canonical' repository that you forked > from, asking them to pull certain commits from your fork. > We must be talking about a different way of using git. In my case I created a local repo from the remote github repo using the following command: git clone git://github.com/richhickey/clojure.git After doing this, I still contend that the correct way to update my local repo is to cd to the directory of my local repo and run "git pull". Do you think that's wrong? It seems to me in this scenario the command we shouldn't use it "git push" because that would attempt push my changes back to the github repo. -- R. Mark Volkmann Object Computing, Inc. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
