Re: New way of tracking remote branches -- question

From: Steven Grimm <koreth@midwinter.com>
Date: Jan 6, 2007, 02:11 UTC
Message-ID: <459F056D.8010705@midwinter.com>
In-Reply-To: <7v8xghariv.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Junio C Hamano wrote:

> I think other poeple on the list (especially the ones who wanted
> separate remote layout) prefer not to have the automatic fork of
> all remote branches.
>

I'm a big fan of separate remote, and while I don't necessarily think automatic fork should be the default behavior, it might be nice to have an option for it, including setting up the appropriate config entries so push/pull do the expected things.

If that doesn't sound palatable, maybe an option to specify which remote branch to check out by default -- that way you can tell someone to run a particular git-clone command to get a local copy of a specific branch of yours. We just had a need for that here today, in fact. The current behavior is pretty screwy when you want to tell someone to clone your development environment to look at what you're doing; they don't have a good way of knowing which of your branches they're going to end up with, since you might be working in any of them when they happen to run git-clone. You end up having to say, "Run git-clone, then run git-branch, and if you don't see '* xyz', then run 'git-checkout -b xyz origin/xyz'."

-Steve