Re: [PATCH 2/2] Make local branches behave like remote branches when --tracked
- From
Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net>
- Date
- Mar 27, 2009, 16:52 UTC
- Message-ID
- <49CD0440.6010304@drmicha.warpmail.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <7v1vsjey3s.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 27.03.2009 17:20:
Show 22 quoted lines
> Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> writes: > >> Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 27.03.2009 09:08: >> ... >>> After calling r-f-t, because this new code assumes that for the "." remote >>> (aka "local repository"), r-f-t lies and does not give back what it >>> expects, fixes what it got back from r-f-t. Shouldn't we be fixing this >>> inside r-f-t? >> >> The technical reason is that there is no local remote, i.e. no remote >> struct for '.', and I don't think we want it, because it would show up >> in all places where the list of remotes is searched/displayed/... >> >> With ret being the branch we talk about, r-f-t is passed ret->remote and >> ret->merge[i] only. In the local case, r-f-t cannot use the remote >> struct for '.' (there is none) to find what it needs, and it has no easy >> access to ret->merge_names[i] which is that info. >> >> branch_get(), on the other hand, has all needed info in place. > > Thanks for a detailed explanation. Would it deserve to be in the commit > log justification in a summarized form?
You tell me :) I'm still unsure at times how detailed commit messages should be, but I take it I should put a shortened version of the above in there.
Show 8 quoted lines
> >> ..., even worse: if foo is >> ambiguous because refs/heads/foo and refs/remotes/foo exist then >> refs/heads/foo would win, i.e. we used to output the *wrong* ref. The >> above disambiguates. But I'll see if I can simplify the output based on >> the necessity of disambiguation. > > Thanks.
I thought about doing the following: - remove occurences of refs/remotes (like before the patch) and of refs/heads. That way the output format stays the same, the amiguity problem is not worsened - think later/harder about doing this more cleverly. I guess I need to check the output of dwim_ref, but have to figure out all the input parameters first...
Michael