{"thread":{"id":"3927","subject":"Branch metainformation","startedAt":"2006-04-20T07:39:09Z","lastAt":"2006-04-20T11:41:17Z","messageCount":4,"participants":["Jakub Narebski","Johannes Schindelin","Junio C Hamano"],"isPatch":false,"patchVersion":null,"patchTotal":null},"messages":[{"id":"18909","messageId":"e27dqv$u6f$1@sea.gmane.org","threadId":"3927","inReplyTo":null,"subject":"Branch metainformation","fromName":"Jakub Narebski","fromEmail":"jnareb@gmail.com","sentAt":"2006-04-20T07:39:09Z","receivedAt":"2006-04-20T07:39:09Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"jnareb@gmail.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2706?v=4"},"body":"It seems that ever so often there is question posted on this list on which\nthe answer is to add '+' in 'pu' branch 'Pull:' line. I think that it is\nnot a good policy to have puller to remember which branches can be\nfast-forwarded, and which needs to be merged. It should be an information\nset and stored by person managing the branch (pullee), as some kind of\nmetainformation for the branch (like description and optional signature is\nfor tags).\n\nPerhaps then there would be a place for short, one-line description of the\nbranch...\n\n-- \nJakub Narebski\nWarsaw, Poland\n"},{"id":"18910","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0604201131240.9099@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de","threadId":"3927","inReplyTo":"e27dqv$u6f$1@sea.gmane.org","subject":"Re: Branch metainformation","fromName":"Johannes Schindelin","fromEmail":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","sentAt":"2006-04-20T09:37:29Z","receivedAt":"2006-04-20T09:37:29Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/127790?v=4"},"body":"Hi,\n\nOn Thu, 20 Apr 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote:\n\n> It seems that ever so often there is question posted on this list on which\n> the answer is to add '+' in 'pu' branch 'Pull:' line. I think that it is\n> not a good policy to have puller to remember which branches can be\n> fast-forwarded, and which needs to be merged. It should be an information\n> set and stored by person managing the branch (pullee), as some kind of\n> metainformation for the branch (like description and optional signature is\n> for tags).\n> \n> Perhaps then there would be a place for short, one-line description of the\n> branch...\n\nI have an alternative in my private repository: When git-pull/git-fetch \nare called with \"-S \", then the current URL is set as URL for that \nshorthand, and the rest is *added* as Pull line.\n\nHowever, this all depends on my (rejected) patch to move the remotes \ninformation into the config file.\n\nI have not backported the \"-S\" feature to the non-config remotes, \nsince I 1) do not need it myself, and 2) am wary that it is not that easy \nto ensure data integrity by shell-scripting.\n\nCiao,\nDscho\n"},{"id":"18913","messageId":"7vwtdkzh1u.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","threadId":"3927","inReplyTo":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0604201131240.9099@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de","subject":"Re: Branch metainformation","fromName":"Junio C Hamano","fromEmail":"junkio@cox.net","sentAt":"2006-04-20T10:18:21Z","receivedAt":"2006-04-20T10:18:21Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"gitster@pobox.com","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/54884?v=4"},"body":"Johannes Schindelin writes:\n\n> However, this all depends on my (rejected) patch to move the remotes \n> information into the config file.\n\nYou seem to keep saying rejected, but IIRC you did not finish it\nIOW the patch was not ready to be merged. I do not recall, for\nexample, reading the part that touches git-parse-remote or\ngit-fetch to read from the config, but it was a long time ago\nand my recollection is vague.\n\nWhile we are talking about per branch property, some issues\nraised on the list (and #git) recently would be helped by a\nconvention (and perhaps some core side support) for per-branch\nproperty. Here is a short list.\n\n + When I am on branch X, I would want \"git pull\" to pull\n (i.e. fetch and merge) from repository Y, not always \"origin\".\n\n + When I am on branch X, I would want \"git push\" to push to\n repository Y (we do not even use \"origin\" as the default for\n push).\n\n + This branch is not to be rebased (you could do this using\n custom pre-rebase hook but having a standard \"branch property\"\n would make it easy for such a hook to decide.\n\n - Do not merge and base your work on this branch -- this is\n \"view only\" and unstable (e.g. \"pu\" in git.git).\n\nIf we were to do a remote to config reorganization (for that we\nneed a migration plan and a period that we support both), the\nper-branch configuration should be designed to support at least\nthe commonly asked ones.\n"},{"id":"18915","messageId":"Pine.LNX.4.63.0604201335070.13022@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de","threadId":"3927","inReplyTo":"7vwtdkzh1u.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net","subject":"Re: Branch metainformation","fromName":"Johannes Schindelin","fromEmail":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","sentAt":"2006-04-20T11:41:17Z","receivedAt":"2006-04-20T11:41:17Z","isPatch":false,"sender":{"key":"johannes.schindelin@gmx.de","avatar":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/127790?v=4"},"body":"Hi,\n\nOn Thu, 20 Apr 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:\n\n> Johannes Schindelin writes:\n> \n> > However, this all depends on my (rejected) patch to move the remotes \n> > information into the config file.\n> \n> You seem to keep saying rejected, but IIRC you did not finish it\n\nI had another impression: people seemed less than enthusiastic about it. \nBut maybe I misunderstood, and only the automatic rewriting part was \ndisliked. I'll try to find time to clean the patch and resend it...\n\n> While we are talking about per branch property, some issues\n> raised on the list (and #git) recently would be helped by a\n> convention (and perhaps some core side support) for per-branch\n> property. Here is a short list.\n> \n> + When I am on branch X, I would want \"git pull\" to pull\n> (i.e. fetch and merge) from repository Y, not always \"origin\".\n> \n> + When I am on branch X, I would want \"git push\" to push to\n> repository Y (we do not even use \"origin\" as the default for\n> push).\n> \n> + This branch is not to be rebased (you could do this using\n> custom pre-rebase hook but having a standard \"branch property\"\n> would make it easy for such a hook to decide.\n> \n> - Do not merge and base your work on this branch -- this is\n> \"view only\" and unstable (e.g. \"pu\" in git.git).\n> \n> If we were to do a remote to config reorganization (for that we\n> need a migration plan and a period that we support both), the\n> per-branch configuration should be designed to support at least\n> the commonly asked ones.\n\nHmm. ATM the syntax I use is\n\n\t[remote.company]\n\t\turl = company.com:gits/daproject\n\t\tpull = origin\n\t\tpush = master\n\nSome bits of your wishes could be written as\n\n\t[branch.pu]\n\t\trebase = no\n\t\tpull = company\n\nCiao,\nDscho\n"}]}