Re: [RFC/PATCH] Add fetch.updateHead option

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 18, 2020, 09:43 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMP44s1i+defrfkCprTAOqyJSCAUMsqWe3Fyv+Y2TeAyiAdg8g@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <87wnyjdnb3.fsf@evledraar.gmail.com>

On Wed, Nov 18, 2020 at 3:30 AM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 13 quoted lines

> I haven't taken much time to re-think through the patch/implications of
> this, but I remember running into this and going through some pre-patch
> investigation at some point.
>
> It's really annoying in some cases that "clone" isn't creating the same
> state as "remote". IIRC I was doing some heuristics to figure out the
> remote branch name etc.
>
> Isn't this something we can just change without an option? There were a
> bunch of cases in clone/fetch that were different for no different
> reasons, IIRC I patched one or two of those in the past. But I haven't
> gone through the history of the feature and checked if it was
> intentional.

Apparently remote/HEAD is supposed to be set manually, which is why there is "git remote add -m master", and "git remote set-head origin master".

Personally I don't see any point in that.

I think if no remote/HEAD is set (manually), it should be set automatically on the first "git fetch", and that should mirror the behavior of "git clone". This would be the equivalent of "fetch.updatehead = missing", which in my opinion should be the default.

This configuration was suggested by Jeff King, see:

https://lore.kernel.org/git/20201118020618.GE650959@coredump.intra.peff.net/

Personally I don't need a configuration, I would be happy if "fetch.updatehead = missing" was the default.

Cheers.

-- 
Felipe Contreras