From: Pavel Roskin Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 15:26:31 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH] cg-pull to stop treating "master" specially, fix fetch_local for .git/HEAD Message-ID: <1131722791.1284.20.camel@dv> In-Reply-To: <200511111522.37979.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de> On Fri, 2005-11-11 at 15:22 +0100, Josef Weidendorfer wrote: > On Friday 11 November 2005 05:53, Pavel Roskin wrote: > > I'm not sure if we understand each other, but "recorded" refers to > > automatically determined branch name. If cg-clone can determine the > > branch name, that name should be saved and used for updates. > > > > Whether the branch name is saved in .git/branches/ using hash notation > > (old style) or in .git/remotes/ (new style) is irrelevant. > > Yes. > But for the conrete implementation it is relevant. > > AFAIK, there is not really a "new" and "old" style, but more the > git way (attributes for remote repositories in .git/remotes) and the > Cogito way (attributes for a remote branch). Switching to the "git way" is long overdue, since hashes can be used in the actual path. > "Recording" talks about storing the name of the remote branch that > maps to the local "origin" branch, so I would vote for storing this > in .git/branches/origin. Yes, cg-clone should do its best to determine the branch name and to save it for future use by cg-fetch. > For cg-clone, this is no problem because cg-clone writes this file itself. > Another thing is if you add later on a remote branch with cg-branch-add > without specifying a concrete remote branch name. Do we want the > record the branch name at the first cg-fetch for the future? Good that you noticed that. cg-fetch could do that, but maybe cg-branch-add would be an even better place for that? I mean, cg-branch-add could actually check the repository and prompt the user which branch to use if there is no obvious default. I think, there should be a way to run cg-branch-add without having it connect the repository or prompt the user, but the default should be user-friendly. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin