From: Sean <seanlkml@sympatico.ca>
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 03:45:49 GMT
Subject: Re: git bug? + question
Message-ID: <BAYC1-PASMTP041E1FB36F85221E4E1FB4AEFE0@CEZ.ICE>
In-Reply-To: <7v4pthmew1.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

On Thu, 02 Nov 2006 18:40:30 -0800
Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:

> which is efficient (guaranteed to do only one fetch from remote)
> and convenient.  Also I have Push: mapping set up on my
> main machine to do master:origin, next:next, maint:maint, and
> +pu:pu so that I can replace the first "git pull" on the
> secondary machine with "git push secondary" on my main machine.

One thing that would make separate-remotes nicer to work with
is to have an automatic mapping between any local branch and
one of the same name in remotes.

So for instance, if you have a local branch named pu checked
out and you pull from origin, remotes/origin/pu would be merged
after the fetch unless a manual mapping was defined in the
remotes or config file.

Maybe even going as far as automatically creating a local branch
for each remote branch on clone is worth considering.

On a peripherally related topic, someone on the xorg list was
complaining that after the initial clone, there is no easy way
to track branches that get added/deleted from the remote repo.
It would be nice if pull had an option to automatically add
and remove remote branches from the remotes/<remote>/xxx
namespace.