Re: New way of tracking remote branches -- question

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Jan 9, 2007, 08:28 UTC
Message-ID: <7vejq4r4ci.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <524590.40333.qm@web31802.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Luben Tuikov <ltuikov@yahoo.com> writes:

> I guess, what I want is still to be able to "see" remotes/
> when I do "git branch".

Then do not use "remotes/" but hang everything underneath "heads/" (or "git branch -a").

Of course, the next complaint from you would be that the latest git-clone would not make the traditional layout, but ...

> I think that this "automatic merge/newbie protection" policy,
> should've been well suited to porcelains as opposed to
> git.

... at that point, honestly speaking, I feel that you should do your own "spartan porcelain" that lays things out in a way you prefer.

> So maybe we should take it one step at a time and first
> implement that, still exposing it to "git branch" and then
> if porcelains want to establish a policy on top of this,
> that's fine.  But low-level git should not hide this from me.

No low-level is hiding anything from you.

It used to be 'find .git/refs/ -type f' was the lowest level, and these days git-for-each-ref is the lowest level. "git branch" has always been Porcelain.

> I really think that the line separating porcelains from git
> should be drawn at some point.

And drawing this line was done long time ago (notice different sections in Documentation/git.txt).

While I've been claiming that I do not do Porcelain, the nature of what are shipped with git have changed enough over time. The Porcelain-ish has long been "barely usable spartan set", hoping that people would do different porcelains depending on their needs, but that has never materialized, except perhaps a notable example of StGIT.

I described my position on recent focus on Porcelain-ish in the initial "digression" part of this:

http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/34908/focus=34914

We've taken "one step at a time" by first introducing separate remote layout as an option, taught 'git branch' the needed options such as -a and -r, and then made this the default layout. It still looks _different_ to me from what I am used to, but that's just traditionalist speaking and I cannot really deny the advantage of the separate remote layout offers. In other words, we have been doing "one step at a time".