Re: [PATCH/RFC] Convenient support of remote branches in git-checkout

[Josef Weidendorfer <Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de>]

On Tuesday 07 November 2006 03:27, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> remotes/origin/next as "next's upstream".  While we are on
> 'next' branch, we might want to refer to "HEAD's upstream".
> 
> I am not sure what the syntax for that should be, though.
> Perhaps "HEAD@upstream"?

I remember an idea floating around was to use a virtual
branch "ORIGIN" which always maps to the upstream of the current
branch.
 
> Unlike the regular extended sha1 expression modifiers such as
> name~n, name^n, and name^{type}, it does not work with arbitrary
> object name; it can only work with a refname.  Which is similar
> to the '@{time}' notation we added when we started using
> ref-log.  Strictly speaking these should not belong to the sha1
> naming layer, but we can have them anyway for the user's
> convenience.

Yes, this makes sense. Branch relations like "upstream" is a
local configuration issue, similar to reflogs.

I vote for "HEAD@up", short form "@up".