From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 21:39:41 GMT
Subject: Re: efficient cloning
Message-ID: <7vk6aokd7m.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <20060320151833.GN18185@pasky.or.cz>

Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> writes:

> I think this sucks the way it is, because you still have only a single
> namespace for remotes (still quite a huge improvement to the current git
> situation), but you can have many upstreams.

Come on, give me a break.

You are commenting on the initial 'git-clone' and specifically
on one of its optional feature.  What multiple upstreams?

The whole point of what git-clone does on top of making a
straight clone of the remote is to give you a reasonable
starting point.  The traditional "master" -> "origin" mapping is
good for cloning a typical single-head repository.  If your
upsteram has more branches, --use-separate-remote would help you
to start your branch namespace uncluttered.

If you want to go fancier after the initial clone to
"cg-add-branch" more upstreams, you can implement a customized
editor, even a graphical one if you want, that inspects
$GIT_DIR/[branches,remotes} _and_ $GIT_DIR/{heads,remotes},
shows the current status, and lets you edit the contents of a
$GIT_DIR/remotes/foobar _while_ making matching changes to what
are under $GIT_DIR/{heads,remotes}.