Re: [RFD] making separate-remote layout easier to use
- From
Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
- Date
- Nov 25, 2006, 23:34 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200611260034.23974.jnareb@gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vvel3yuzz.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 27 quoted lines
> Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com> writes: > >> Junio C Hamano wrote: >> >>> Now separate-remote layout is the default for newly cloned >>> repositories, I think it is a good time to make further effort >>> to make things easier to use. Here are some of the ideas off >>> the top of my head. >> [...] >>> * Change the default contents of $GIT_DIR/remotes/origin >> >> The question is: do we continue to use remotes/ file, or do we >> save remotes info in the config file: remote.<name>.url, >> remote.<name>.fetch, remote.<name>.push and branch.<name>.merge >> (in our case '[remote "origin"]' section)? > > It is not "the question"; it is irrelevant because > $GIT_DIR/remotes/origin and [remote "origin"] are pretty much > interchangeable, and will hopefully continue to be. > > [remote "origin"] > url = master.kernel.org:/pub/scm/git/git.git/ > fetch = +refs/heads/master:refs/remotes/origin/master > fetch = +refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/origin/* > > would be the way to express the equilvalent of the example in > the previous message.
Well, the question is if git-clone would generate appropriate config entries in addition to or instead of $GIT_DIR/remotes/origin file...
By the way, what do you think about extended refspec syntax, namely in addition to <remote name>:<local name> it would allow to say <remote name>:<local name>:<local branch to merge into>?
-- Jakub Narebski