Re: How is working on arbitrary remote heads supposed to work in Cogito (+ PATCH)?
- From
- Carl Baldwin <cnb@fc.hp.com>
- Date
- Aug 13, 2005, 04:11 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20050813041114.GA29412@hpsvcnb.fc.hp.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20050729081051.GH24895@pasky.ji.cz>
On Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 08:10:51AM +0000, Petr Baudis wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> Exactly. I want much more freedom in pushing, the only requirement being > that "the to-be-replaced remote head is ancestor of the to-be-pushed > local head". I think (am I wrong?) git-send-pack localhead:remotehead > would work just fine for me, the only thing I need is the support for > different local and remote head names.
Greetings,
Sorry to join the game so late. I've only read this thread now.
It seems to me that this is the way to go. Several have mentioned that head names should be the same on the remote and the local side. However, I wanted to point out that it may be impossible to keep these names in sync due to the 'loosely knit' nature of the types of projects that are likely to use git.
It seems that the requirement that the remote head be a strict ancestor of the local head is actually quite strong and should avoid mistakes like pushing to the wrong head.
Anyway, those are my two cents. I couldn't tell wether a resolution had been achieved so I thought I would pipe up.
Carl
-- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Carl Baldwin Systems VLSI Laboratory Hewlett Packard Company MS 88 work: 970 898-1523 3404 E. Harmony Rd. work: Carl.N.Baldwin@hp.com Fort Collins, CO 80525 home: Carl@ecBaldwin.net - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -