Re: GIT vs Other: Need argument

From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Apr 23, 2007, 22:23 UTC
Message-ID: <7vps5ud91x.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <877is29b1l.wl%cworth@cworth.org>

Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org> writes:

Show 22 quoted lines

> When I raised this recently, Junio suggested something like the
> following:
>
> 	git config --global branch.autosetupmerge true	[*]
> 	git clone <URL>
> 	git checkout -b <branch> origin/<branch>
> 	git pull
>
> I haven't gotten around to replying to that message yet, but the
> thrust of my reply would be that that does actually work, but it's not
> even close to the ease with which one can track the default branch as
> Linus described:
>
>>    None of the above are ever really needed for that case, and I think all
>>    you really want to learn is:
>>
>> 	git clone
>> 	git pull
>
> So, currently, all non-default branches have a sort of second-class
> status from the point of view of users that just want to track
> them.

It is true that non default ones are second class status. That's why they are not "default" ;-).

The autosetup configuration needs to be done once for the user (not tied to any project), so you are talking about difference between:

	git clone
        git pull
        git pull
        git pull
        git pull
        git pull
	...

vs

	git clone
        git checkout -b next origin/next
        git pull
        git pull
        git pull
        git pull
        git pull
	...

'git clone' step in both are done only once per project's working tree, 'git checkout -b' step is done once for the particular branch you are interested in, and after that you will doing 'git pull' every day or every minute. I do not think one extra step is a big enough deal to make second class citizens scream about inequality.