Re: Cleaning up git user-interface warts
From: Karl Hasselström <hidden>
Date: 2016-08-11 19:23:37
On 2006-11-15 13:11:36 -0500, Nicolas Pitre wrote:
On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:quoted
Nicolas Pitre [off-list ref] writes:quoted
But again I think it is important that the URL to use must be a per branch attribute i.e. attached to "default/master" and not just "default". This way someone could add all branches of interest into the "default" group even if they're from different repositories, and a simple get without any argument would get them all.I think the "one group per one remote repository" model is a lot easier to explain. At least when I read your first "branch group" proposal that was I thought was going on and I found it quite sensible (and it maps more or less straightforwardly to the way existing .git/refs/remotes is set up by default).I think one group per remote repo is how things should be by default too. But we should not limit it to that if possible.
Without the limitation, we risk name collisions when getting all branches from the remote repository (that is, including any new branches we previously didn't know about). -- Karl Hasselström, kha@treskal.com