Re: efficient cloning

From: Josef Weidendorfer <josef.weidendorfer@gmx.de>
Date: Mar 21, 2006, 00:26 UTC
Message-ID: <200603210126.59870.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <7voe00iupp.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

On Tuesday 21 March 2006 00:04, you wrote:

> > Linus wanted to still be able to say "origin" which automatically
> > would map to "remotes/origin/master", where the name of the remote
> 
> I do not remember that,

See http://www.gelato.unsw.edu.au/archives/git/0603/17405.html

I found it strange at first. But I think it is the right thing.

Show 6 quoted lines

> I think what is reasonable is something like this:
> 
>  - If you start from a repository cloned in the traditional
>    way, the upstream "master" is kept track of with your
>    "origin", so "diff origin master" would be "my changes on top
>    of the upstream".

Yes. And it would be nice if the same would work with the new layout, assuming that there is no local "origin" branch, but a .git/remotes/origin file and .git/refs/remotes/origin directory.

>  - Regardless of how you started your cloned repository, with an
>    $GIT_DIR/{remotes,refs/heads,refs/remotes} editor I hinted in
>    a separate message, you can rearrange things to organize the
>    refs/ hierarchy any way you want.

Yes. Still it would be nice to have a fixed convention here. Eg. gitk could decorate the namespace in a special way. Even if it is most of the time "origin" only.

Show 5 quoted lines

> [Footnote]
> 
> *1* ... which currently I do not plan to do myself unless I have
> absolutely nothing else to do and really bored.  A sound of huge
> hint dropping ;-).

It should be as simple as (probably with quite some errors)

~/> cat git-rename-remote.sh mv .git/refs/remotes/$1 .git/refs/remotes/$2 sed -e "s|remotes/$1|remotes/$2" .git/remotes/$1 > .git/remotes/$2 rm .git/remotes/$1

If you allow more freedom regarding the use of refs/remotes, it gets more complicated both for the script and for the user to understand.

Josef