From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 18:34:50 GMT
Subject: Re: What should "git fetch origin +next" should do?
Message-ID: <7vipnnmppx.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <20111017171041.GA12837@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> I think the exact same confusion exists. I told git to update 'next'
> from origin, but it didn't touch refs/remotes/origin/next.

Except that you didn't tell git to *update* the remote tracking branch for
'next'; you merely told it to fetch 'next' at the remote.

> ...  But I suspect that is not how many git users think of it.

I am inclined to agree that it might be the case; see my other message in
this thread.

> We've discussed this before, of course:
>
>   http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/127163/focus=127215

Yes, you brought up the "remote state as of the time I told git to record
it is a precious piece of information" issue, and I share the reasoning,
hence I am somewhat torn.

We might be better off biting the bullet and do the "rewrite a command
line colon-less refspec using a matching configured refspec iff exists"
and defer the history of remote tracking branches to its reflog in the
longer term.