From: Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Date: Sat, 04 Nov 2006 19:05:12 GMT
Subject: Re: git bug? + question
Message-ID: <20061104190512.GA2517@spearce.org>
In-Reply-To: <200611041852.23867.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de>

Josef Weidendorfer <Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de> wrote:
> On Saturday 04 November 2006 06:03, Shawn Pearce wrote:
> > 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?

Ah.

I probably should have also stated that my users should be doing
-n as well with git clone, then using git checkout -b to create
a new branch from one of the refs they did clone.  (Reason is we
strictly follow a topic branch model of development, with even the
developer's local branches beginning with their initials.)

But you have a good point.  Cloning with say --only as I show above
might be confusing as its not defined what branch to checkout after
the clone.
 
> 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)

Yes, that would work for our workflow.  I won't try to speak about
anyone else's.

I'd also say that if the local branch (refs/heads/vmdvt) exists and
if `git pull . origin/vmdvt` is going to be a fast-forward that the
fast-forward should happen during the checkout.  That way after the
checkout is complete you really do have what is in origin/vmdvt,
but are sitting on a local branch.

--