Re: [1.8.0] Provide proper remote ref namespaces
- From
Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 7, 2011, 09:01 UTC
- Message-ID
- <AANLkTiksUqVnWeZOm-9XN3BbfVcjc6fWdwPcPJ-PLb88@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <201102070958.11551.johan@herland.net>
Heya,
On Mon, Feb 7, 2011 at 09:58, Johan Herland <johan@herland.net> wrote:
Show 7 quoted lines
> This is the same technique we use when talking about branch names: On this > mailing list, nobody is confused when I refer to 'maint', 'master', 'next' > and 'pu'. Still, in our own work repos (at least in mine), these branches > are actually called "refs/remotes/origin/<name>" (commonly referred to by > their shorthands "origin/<name>"). Here we are, juggling the same kind of > namespaces that I propose for tags, and it seems to work well without > causing much confusion.
With the difference that you can't refer to "maint" as just "maint" unless you've created "refs/heads/maint" iff it is unambiguous.
-- Cheers, Sverre Rabbelier