Re: Cloning empty repository uses locally configured default branch name

> Jonathan Tan <jonathantanmy@google.com> writes:
> 
> > Has anyone looked into solutions for this? Both protocol v0 and v2 do
> > not send symref information about unborn branches (v0 because, as
> > protocol-capabilities.txt says, "servers SHOULD include this capability
> > for the HEAD symref if it is one of the refs being sent"; v2 because
> > a symref is included only if it refers to one of the refs being sent).
> > In protocol v2, this could be done by adding a capability to ls-remote
> > (maybe, "unborn"), and in protocol v0, this could be done either by
> > updating the existing "symref" capability to be written even when the
> > target branch is unborn (which is potentially backwards incompatible) or
> > introducing a new capability which is like "symref".
> 
> Thanks for looking into this (I think this came up again today
> during my reviews of some topic).
> 
> It would be a backward incompatible change to add to v0, but at this
> point shouldn't we be leaving v0 as-is and move everybody to v2?
> 
> If it is a simple and safe enough change, though, saying "why not"
> is very tempting, though.