Re: remote#branch

From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Oct 31, 2007, 01:43 UTC
Message-ID: <20071031014347.GB23274@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <46a038f90710301741n67526976vda1cd131270aa7f@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Oct 31, 2007 at 01:41:12PM +1300, Martin Langhoff wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> Having something functionally similar to
> 
>   cg-clone git://foo.tld/bar.git#blue
> 
> would save a few steps -- and some potential confusion -- for projects
> using GIT.
> 
> In case it's not clear what it does (not everyone here has used
> cogito) it will create and checkout a branch tracking the "blue" head
> on the repo when the clone is done. This is _instead of_ creating and
> checking out the branch that tracks the configured "HEAD" of the repo.

Actually, IIRC it won't fetch any of the non 'blue' refs.

Anyway, to recap (my impression of) the discussion leading up to this:
  - the cogito feature is useful
  - the cogito syntax does not allow for multiple branches to be
    specified
  - one such syntax proposed was git://foo.tld/bar.git#blue,red
  - one problem with that syntax is that comma is a valid character
    in the branch name, and '#' is a valid character in the repo name
  - one proposed solution was that '#' and ',' when used as data should
    be URL-encoded
  - flamefest begin

So I think nobody disagrees that such a feature is useful; there is disagreement about the syntax.

-Peff