From: Josef Weidendorfer <josef.weidendorfer@gmx.de>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2005 14:22:37 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cg-pull to stop treating "master" specially, fix fetch_local for .git/HEAD
Message-ID: <200511111522.37979.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <1131684784.31172.16.camel@dv>

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).

"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.

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?

> That's why I mentioned the idea of having a separate file to indicate
> the default branch for export.

Agree.

Josef