From: Junio C Hamano Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 16:20:39 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] Make local branches behave like remote branches when --tracked Message-ID: <7v1vsjey3s.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> In-Reply-To: <49CC9285.407@drmicha.warpmail.net> Michael J Gruber 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? > ..., 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.