Re: git-svn and huge data and modifying the git-svn-HEAD branch directly

From: Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com>
Date: Feb 28, 2006, 00:25 UTC
Message-ID: <46a038f90602271625y6c7e9072u372b8dd3662e272c@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20060227192422.GB9518@hand.yhbt.net>

On 2/28/06, Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net> wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> > If it is not supposed to be changed by the user, maybe it could be
> > stored as a tag.
> >
> > Or maybe another type of reference can be introduced. refs/remote/, for
> > branches we are tracking, but which should not be modified locally.
>
> Either of those could work for me.  Changing git-svn-HEAD to become a
> tag would probably be easier (not having to update other tools, such as
> git-fetch), but refs/remote may make more sense.

git-svn-HEAD "moves" so it's really a bad idea to have it as a tag. Nothing within core git prevents it from moving, but I think that porcelains will start breaking. Tags and heads are the same thing, except that heads are expected to change (specifically, to move forward), and tags are expected to stand still.

Something else is needed -- a convention to mark a head as 'readonly' so that git-commit/cg-commit refuse to commit to it. cg-commit already does that for any head matching the name of a branch.

cheers,

martin