Re: git bug? + question
From: Josef Weidendorfer <hidden>
Date: 2016-08-11 20:02:48
On Saturday 04 November 2006 06:03, Shawn Pearce wrote:
After reading your reply you are probably correct. I can see there may be workflows that want every remote branch also created as a local branch. I could certainly live with a command line option to clone, e.g.: git clone --only vmdvt,vmtip user@host:/path...
Still missing here: What branch should be checked out after cloning? Perhaps it is better to extend git-checkout to allow to do the correct thing when the user specifies a read-only branch from refs/remotes. E.g. with refs/remotes/origin/vmdvt, git checkout origin/vmdvt should create a new local branch refs/heads/vmdvt which forks from remotes/origin/vmdvt (and abort with error if refs/heads/vmdvt already exists without being the local development branch for remotes/origin/vmdvt), add to .git/config [branch "vmdvt"] remote = origin merge = remotes/origin/vmdvt and switch to this new created branch. Given this addition to git-checkout, the implicit default action after cloning with --use-separate-remote should be git checkout origin/master where "master" can be changed on the git-clone command line to another branch, e.g. "--checkout vmdvt". IMHO, this addition to git-checkout would make it a lot easier to work with --use-separate-remote, as there, every branch other the master is read-only. And if you have two remote repositories with a master branch each, and you want to develop locally on both, this could be accomplished with git checkout -b othermaster remotes/otherrepo/master