Re: [RFH] hackday and GSoC topic suggestions

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Feb 11, 2014, 19:38 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqeh39phi6.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq1tz9qxyl.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

Show 14 quoted lines

> Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
>
>>  - Branch rename breaks local downstream branches
>>    http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/241228
>
> If you have a branch B that builds on A, if you are renaming A to C,
> you may want B to automatically set to build on C in some cases, and
> in other cases your renaming A is done explicitly in order to severe
> the tie between A and B and setting the latter to build on C can be
> a bad thing---after all, the user's intention may be to create a
> branch A starting at some commit immediately after this rename so
> that B will keep building on that updated A.
>
> So I am not sure if this is a bug.

Having said that, the current behaviour of leaving B half-configured to build on a missing branch is undesirable. If we were to change this so that any branch B that used to build on branch A being renamed to build on the branch under the new name C, the user may have to do an extra "--set-upstream-to A" on B after recreating A if this was done to save away the current state of A to C and then keep building B on an updated A, so we may have to give _some_ clue what we are doing behind their back when we rename, e.g.

	$ git branch -m A C
        warning: branch B is set to build on C now.

or something.