Hi Peff

On 01/11/2019 16:49, Jeff King wrote:

On Fri, Nov 01, 2019 at 12:29:43PM +0000, Phillip Wood wrote:

quoted

quoted

quoted

I'd love to see a consensus around putting remote versions of refs/foo under
refs/remote/<remote-name>/foo. To share notes I add a refspec that fetches
to refs/remote/<remote-name>/notes. It is a pain that 'git pull' wont merge
them for me though.

The trouble with that sort of scheme is that it conflicts with the
current namespace scheme, which puts the remote "notes" branch in
"refs/remotes/<remote-name>/notes". And it's not just a problem if you
want to have a branch called "notes". Think about what "git fetch
--prune" would do.

I was suggesting a convention of using refs/remote/ not refs/remotes/ for
tracking remote refs that are not branches to avoid that problem. It's not
ideal to have remote branches under a different namespace to all the other
remote refs but it does avoid breaking current setups. I haven't thought it
through but perhaps in the long run we could migrate remote branches to
refs/remote/<remote-name>/heads/ and treat refs/remotes/<remote-name>/ as an
alias for refs/remote/<remote-name>/heads/. As you say below we'd need to
think about how to use remote tags as well.

Oh indeed, I totally missed that subtlety. Sorry.

I should have made the difference clearer, it's easy to miss the missing 
's'

quoted

Thanks for the links, I'll have a read through them.

Maybe I've managed to trick you into working on the greater refs/remotes
organization problem, though. ;)

Maybe we'll see once I've read those threads next week!

Phillip

-Peff