Re: git branch --edit-description a custom file

> > > I'd love to see a consensus around putting remote versions of refs/foo under
> > > refs/remote/<remote-name>/foo. To share notes I add a refspec that fetches
> > > to refs/remote/<remote-name>/notes. It is a pain that 'git pull' wont merge
> > > them for me though.
> > 
> > The trouble with that sort of scheme is that it conflicts with the
> > current namespace scheme, which puts the remote "notes" branch in
> > "refs/remotes/<remote-name>/notes". And it's not just a problem if you
> > want to have a branch called "notes". Think about what "git fetch
> > --prune" would do.
> 
> I was suggesting a convention of using refs/remote/ not refs/remotes/ for
> tracking remote refs that are not branches to avoid that problem. It's not
> ideal to have remote branches under a different namespace to all the other
> remote refs but it does avoid breaking current setups. I haven't thought it
> through but perhaps in the long run we could migrate remote branches to
> refs/remote/<remote-name>/heads/ and treat refs/remotes/<remote-name>/ as an
> alias for refs/remote/<remote-name>/heads/. As you say below we'd need to
> think about how to use remote tags as well.