Re: clone breaks replace
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Jan 11, 2011, 05:36 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20110111053653.GB10094@sigill.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vmxnc48yt.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
On Fri, Jan 07, 2011 at 02:58:34PM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 14 quoted lines
> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes: > > > 2. Should clone fetch refs from refs/replace (either by default, or > > with an option)? > > ... > > Which leads to the second question. It is basically a matter of saying > > "do you want to fetch the view that upstream has"? I can definitely see > > that being useful, and meriting an option. However, it may or may not be > > worth turning on by default, as upstream's view may be confusing. > > I think that should be stated a bit differently. "Do you want to fetch > the view that the upstream offers as an option, and if you want, which > ones (meaning: there could be more than one replacement grafts to give > different views)?"
Sure, I think that is a sane way for the user to think about it, but do we actually support multiple views? I thought replacement objects were all or nothing.
-Peff