Re: Another use of "@"?

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: May 3, 2013, 06:39 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMP44s3pN22yfvs_PTzGFfp2cxm3gFMU0ofZ0bNBnzB_yfo+6Q@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8AcWV8hmbhG27dw+GdnZf8NnQEctYmowqd3sSzOOHf+xg@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 9:51 PM, Duy Nguyen <pclouds@gmail.com> wrote:

Show 18 quoted lines

> Hi,
>
> My setup is a bit peculiar where I do git development on three
> different machines. Say I updated branch long-branch-name on machine
> A. Then I continue my work on machine B. I would want to hard reset
> that long-branch-name on machine B before resuming my work. What I
> usually do is
>
> git co long-branch-name
> git diff A/long-branch-name
> git reset --hard A/long-branch-name
>
> but typing long-branch-name (even with TAB completion) is not fun.
> Could I do this (or something similar) instead?
>
> git co long-branch-name
> git diff A/@
> git reset --hard A/@

Maybe this would make more sense:

%git co long-branch-name %git reset --keep A/long-branch-name

If you have changes but they don't conflict, they will be carried over, and it they do conflict, the reset won't continue. I think in most cases there will be no conflict, so the times you need to do 'git diff' will be rather small.

Yes, many times I would like an idiom that would just replace something with the current branch, like your A/@, but I don't know where the right place for that would be.

Also, I feel we are missing some kind of branch, like a remote-specific upstream, so instead of 'git reset A/foo' you would do 'git reset A@{u}'. By default the remote-specific upstream would be the same name of the branch, but it could be configured.

Moreover, we should probably have common aliases distributed (e.g. git co).

-- 
Felipe Contreras