From: Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net>
Date: Wed, 16 May 2007 02:30:21 GMT
Subject: Re: pull/push inconsistencies
Message-ID: <7vy7jpfqki.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <46a038f90705151851i9027e01x993300b1b50d0285@mail.gmail.com>

"Martin Langhoff" <martin.langhoff@gmail.com> writes:

>> I understand him to be saying that it *doesn't* do that, and that he
>> *wants* it to.
>
> I'm probably in a bad-communication day :-/

Sorry, I think I am lacking my medication :-/

> I have locally .git/refs/remotes/origin/foo, and the remote repo has
> refs/heads/foo. I don't have .git/refs/heads/foo in this case. When I
> do git-push, it doesn't really change the remote repo, but it _tells_
> me it has.
>
> So - behaviour-wise, it's fine. It's not changing the remote repo. But
> it tells me it does. It's just plain weird and misleading...

I would agree with that it is misleading or plain wrong if it
says it updated something that it didn't.

>> People think of refs/remotes/origin as a cache of the origin
>> repository's branch heads, and they expect it to be updated on write
>> (push) as well as read (fetch).
>
> Yes ;-)

On a related note, I think recent series from Daniel, parked in
'pu' while 1.5.2 is prepared, contained a new feature to update
the refs/remotes/origin/* on the pushing repository after
git-push, to save one round of fetch (that is, pretend that you
fetched immediately after you pushed).