From: Sverre Rabbelier <srabbelier@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2011 09:01:06 GMT
Subject: Re: [1.8.0] Provide proper remote ref namespaces
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:
> 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