Re: git bug? + question

From: Josef Weidendorfer <josef.weidendorfer@gmx.de>
Date: Nov 4, 2006, 17:52 UTC
Message-ID: <200611041852.23867.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de>
In-Reply-To: <20061104050305.GA9003@spearce.org>

On Saturday 04 November 2006 06:03, Shawn Pearce wrote:

Show 7 quoted lines

> After reading your reply you are probably correct.  I can see there
> may be workflows that want every remote branch also created as a
> local branch.
> 
> I could certainly live with a command line option to clone, e.g.:
> 
> 	git clone --only vmdvt,vmtip user@host:/path...

Still missing here: What branch should be checked out after cloning?

Perhaps it is better to extend git-checkout to allow to do the correct thing when the user specifies a read-only branch from refs/remotes. E.g. with refs/remotes/origin/vmdvt,

 	git checkout origin/vmdvt

should create a new local branch refs/heads/vmdvt which forks from remotes/origin/vmdvt (and abort with error if refs/heads/vmdvt already exists without being the local development branch for remotes/origin/vmdvt), add to .git/config

[branch "vmdvt"]
	remote = origin
	merge = remotes/origin/vmdvt

and switch to this new created branch.

Given this addition to git-checkout, the implicit default action after cloning with --use-separate-remote should be

	git checkout origin/master

where "master" can be changed on the git-clone command line to another branch, e.g. "--checkout vmdvt".

IMHO, this addition to git-checkout would make it a lot easier to work with --use-separate-remote, as there, every branch other the master is read-only.

And if you have two remote repositories with a master branch each, and you want to develop locally on both, this could be accomplished with

	git checkout -b othermaster remotes/otherrepo/master