Re: git push (mis ?)behavior

From: Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@zib.de>
Date: Oct 9, 2007, 07:23 UTC
Message-ID: <5C3443FD-DEC3-4EDC-B10B-0C4307EF9492@zib.de>
In-Reply-To: <20071009050533.GA2968@efreet.light.src>

On Oct 9, 2007, at 7:05 AM, Jan Hudec wrote:

Show 32 quoted lines

> On Fri, Sep 28, 2007 at 00:07:27 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>> Steffen Prohaska <prohaska@zib.de> writes:
>>
>>> When "remote.<name>.push" is set I'd expect "git push" to
>>> choose only the 'right' remote.<name>.push lines, that is
>>> the lines that have the current branch as the local ref.
>
> I would like this for another reason and maybe in slightly  
> different way.
> Basically I would have configured something along the lines:
>     [remote "origin"]
>     push = refs/heads/*:refs/heads/jahu/*
> and would want to choose, via option, whether I want to push all  
> the branches
> or just the current one, but in any case with the renaming specified.
>
> The idea behind this is to have a shared repository, but not shared  
> branches.
> Everybody would have a subdirectory in refs/heads where he could push
> anything that the others should see and than somebody else (either  
> designated
> integrator, or just anybody different) would do a quick review and  
> merge it
> into master.
>
> Now I could of course push out everything, but usually I'd want to  
> push
> exactly the current branch, renaming it by the rule given, whether  
> it already
> existed in origin or not. Than there can be eg. a post-receive hook  
> notifying
> the integrator that there is something for review.

I had a similar scenario in mind. So a more general question is the following:

Git well supports the clone from read-only and push to private repo scheme. In this case all repositories you're pushing to are by definition _your_ repositories. The only question left is, which subset of your branches are pushed. But there's no need for renaming during push.

Now the question is, what is a sensible workflow on a shared repository?

One option is to use some kind of private 'namespace' scheme. For example developers should push their topics to a branch prefixed with their name, or to a 'subdirectory' ref/heads/needsreview/*.

This workflow may require to 'rename' branches during push. So how can this be supported by git? Supporting only renames that add a prefix, as suggested by Jan, may be reasonable restriction.

	Steffen