From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 25 Nov 2006 23:34:23 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFD] making separate-remote layout easier to use
Message-ID: <200611260034.23974.jnareb@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <7vvel3yuzz.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Junio C Hamano wrote:
> 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