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: Fri, 29 Jul 2005 13:13:04 +0200 Message-ID: <20050729111304.GS24895@pasky.ji.cz> References: <20050728161815.GC17952@pasky.ji.cz> <7v1x5ic1pe.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20050728183904.GA24948@pasky.ji.cz> <7v4qaeqrh3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20050729070628.GA24895@pasky.ji.cz> <7vmzo6jbme.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20050729081051.GH24895@pasky.ji.cz> <7vek9igfgw.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20050729094046.GO24895@pasky.ji.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Jul 29 13:14:34 2005 Return-path: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([12.107.209.244]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DySoi-0002e3-8y for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 29 Jul 2005 13:14:16 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262463AbVG2LNq (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2005 07:13:46 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262483AbVG2LNp (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2005 07:13:45 -0400 Received: from w241.dkm.cz ([62.24.88.241]:36622 "HELO machine.sinus.cz") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S262463AbVG2LNG (ORCPT ); Fri, 29 Jul 2005 07:13:06 -0400 Received: (qmail 18326 invoked by uid 2001); 29 Jul 2005 11:13:04 -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 Fri, Jul 29, 2005 at 12:57:50PM CEST, I got a letter where Johannes Schindelin told me that... > Hi, Hello, > On Fri, 29 Jul 2005, Petr Baudis wrote: > > > You might get the push access rather lately in the process (this "lazy > > development privileges granting" is one of the point of distributed > > VCSes), at point where other people are used to pull from you and > > renaming your branch locally might mean some trouble. > > I still do not get it. What is so wrong with > > git-switch-tree remotehead > git-merge master > git-push remoteside remotehead > > which would have the further advantage of documenting what you really did > in the history. How would that document anything normal push wouldn't? > And if you really want to be able to spread chaos in your own head, you > can do something like > > ln -s master .git/refs/heads/remotehead > git-push remoteside remotehead I'd argue that's much more messy and evil than pushing to heads with different names. If you compare what you just proposed with pushing to heads with different names, what's the advantage? -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ If you want the holes in your knowledge showing up try teaching someone. -- Alan Cox