Re: [PATCH 0/3] Unconfuse git clone when two branches at are HEAD.
- From
Andreas Krey <a.krey@gmx.de>
- Date
- Sep 9, 2013, 16:08 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20130909160817.GN12966@inner.h.apk.li>
- In-Reply-To
- <xmqqr4cy5a2z.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
On Mon, 09 Sep 2013 07:44:04 +0000, Junio C Hamano wrote: ...
> I'd rather not go this route. Allowing refs/heads/master and local
> branches that forked from it in refs/heads/master/{a,b,c,...} could
> be a potentially useful future enhancement,Want! We're currently going the route of naming the branches
master feature/master feature/subfeature/master
to allow feature/subfeature/topic, and feature/subfeature in the first place.
(Other hierarchy separator candidates were ugly, shell-unwieldy, already commonly used within branch names, or illegal.)
Andreas
-- "Totally trivial. Famous last words." From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@*.org> Date: Fri, 22 Jan 2010 07:29:21 -0800