Re: followRemoteHEAD management question

From: Bence Ferdinandy <bence@ferdinandy.com>
Date: Jun 11, 2026, 20:36 UTC
Message-ID: <DJ6IBPYNOTTY.3QKEZQ28P713V@ferdinandy.com>
In-Reply-To: <20260611060123.GA2187173@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On Thu Jun 11, 2026 at 08:01, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

>
> My initial thought is that it might affect clone as well as fetch. But I
> guess this feature does not kick in for clone, as it has its own logic
> for handling the remote-tracking HEAD. Though arguably it should be
> possible to configure it not to create one in the first place.

If memory serves well clone has set the remote/HEAD well before this and I think it indeed uses a different mechanism/logic.

Show 8 quoted lines

>
>> As for another design decision: I'm leaning toward omitting support for
>> the "warn-if-not-$branch" value in fetch.followRemoteHEAD.
>> 
>> My take on that option as-documented is that it serves more as an
>> acknowledgment from the user that "yes, I understand that origin has
>> pointed HEAD at foo, please only warn me if it changes" as opposed to the
>> user expressing that the branch "foo" is in some way special to them.

Yes, that was the reasoning. So I also agree on not adding it to global.

Bit late to the party, but happy to review/test patches if they come.

Best, Bence