From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Petr Baudis Subject: Re: How is working on arbitrary remote heads supposed to work in Cogito (+ PATCH)? Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2005 18:18:15 +0200 Message-ID: <20050728161815.GC17952@pasky.ji.cz> References: <200507271458.43063.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de> <7vll3rlnqm.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <200507271458.43063.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de> <20050728120806.GA2391@pasky.ji.cz> <20050728153506.GL14229@pasky.ji.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Josef Weidendorfer , Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jul 28 21:35:19 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DyE8v-00050h-FV for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 28 Jul 2005 21:34:09 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261578AbVG1QVx (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:21:53 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261456AbVG1QT2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:19:28 -0400 Received: from w241.dkm.cz ([62.24.88.241]:47119 "HELO machine.sinus.cz") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S261556AbVG1QSR (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Jul 2005 12:18:17 -0400 Received: (qmail 21281 invoked by uid 2001); 28 Jul 2005 16:18:15 -0000 To: Johannes Schindelin Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-message-flag: Outlook : A program to spread viri, but it can do mail too. Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Dear diary, on Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 05:56:21PM CEST, I got a letter where Johannes Schindelin told me that... > Hi, Hello, > On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Petr Baudis wrote: > > > Dear diary, on Thu, Jul 28, 2005 at 03:07:01PM CEST, I got a letter > > where Johannes Schindelin told me that... > > > > > On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Petr Baudis wrote: > > > > > > > See above. I would much rather see more flexible git-send-pack. Junio, > > > > what about changing its [heads]* parameter e.g. to > > > > [remotehead[:localhead]]* ? > > > > > > IMHO this opens the door for shooting in your own foot. Isn't it much too > > > easy to make a mistake with that syntax? > > > > What mistake? > > To mix up different branches. With that syntax you can easily push changes > onto the wrong head. How? Only when you explicitly specify the remote head. When you're explicit, you ought to know what are you doing. > I might well be wrong here, but I think the most common usage for git-push > is to update a public repository, which is done by one or just a few > maintainer(s), in which case it is no problem to enforce > localhead=remotehead. BTW, this whole multihead mess applies only to Jeffs > anyway :-) AFAIK the plan is to centralize all the kernel repositories to a single one. For that, developers would generally push into branches with name different that "master". > I just do not see a high demand for mappings of remote and local HEAD > names, but rather a high potential of making mistakes (after all, it is > not the machine which makes mistakes, it's the human operator). If you fear making mistakes, better use something which attempts to do some babysitting for you, like Cogito. ;-) -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ If you want the holes in your knowledge showing up try teaching someone. -- Alan Cox