Re: New way of tracking remote branches -- question

[Steven Grimm <koreth@midwinter.com>]

Junio C Hamano wrote:
> I think other poeple on the list (especially the ones who wanted
> separate remote layout) prefer not to have the automatic fork of
> all remote branches.
>   

I'm a big fan of separate remote, and while I don't necessarily think 
automatic fork should be the default behavior, it might be nice to have 
an option for it, including setting up the appropriate config entries so 
push/pull do the expected things.

If that doesn't sound palatable, maybe an option to specify which remote 
branch to check out by default -- that way you can tell someone to run a 
particular git-clone command to get a local copy of a specific branch of 
yours. We just had a need for that here today, in fact. The current 
behavior is pretty screwy when you want to tell someone to clone your 
development environment to look at what you're doing; they don't have a 
good way of knowing which of your branches they're going to end up with, 
since you might be working in any of them when they happen to run 
git-clone. You end up having to say, "Run git-clone, then run 
git-branch, and if you don't see '* xyz', then run 'git-checkout -b xyz 
origin/xyz'."

-Steve