Re: [RFC] just an (stupid) idea when creating a new branch

From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Jul 9, 2006, 17:04 UTC
Message-ID: <e8rcu5$je5$2@sea.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0607090011000.29667@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>

Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On Sat, 8 Jul 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote:
> 
>> moreau francis wrote:
>> 
>>> Would it be possible to let the user stick a short explanation
>>> on  what a branch is supposed to implement during its creation.
>> 
>> It would be possible when/if branch and remotes config would migrate
>> to .git/config. Currently too many I think relies on refs/heads being
>> simple sha1 of "top" commit.
> 
> But it does not need a change of existing practice at all! Just add the 
> information provided by --topic as branch."pathname".description to the 
> config. And make format-patch aware of that.

And make tools remove stale descriptions. I sometimes rename branches "by hand", as currently there is I think no tool for this...

By the way, did this series of patches (adding support for branch and remotes configuretion to config file) made into 'next', 'master' or even 'pu', or after some discussion it stalled?

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git