You can also have an upstream git repo on a local filesystem and add that as a remote.
But when most people talk about a git server that includes collaboration and giving people SSH access just so that they can read from your repo is not reasonable.
But when most people talk about a git server that includes collaboration and giving people SSH access just so that they can read from your repo is not reasonable.
This would be unwieldy in a corporate environment and for those who don't really grok git, but for a small cadre of experienced developers, this may be a workable model.
The Linux kernel and u-boot also follow similar flows.
Honestly, it's incredibly convenient to send a patch via `git send-email -1`, instead of having to create a for, add a remote, push, and then navigate some web-based wizard.
Actual collaboration does not require write access on the repo. You need to share your patch to the repo owner via another mechanism (email is very suitable for that, but anything that can share text file is ok). The repo owner handle merging patches.
Are you just saying that managing account access at the personal machine level is a lot of work?