From: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
To: David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>
Cc: Russ Brown <pickscrape@gmail.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: git-svn: Branching clarifications
Date: Sat, 8 Sep 2007 00:49:44 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070908074944.GC24166@muzzle> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <85r6l9zlt4.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>
David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> wrote:
> Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net> writes:
>
> > git-svn sets "master" to the most recently committed-to branch
> > in SVN the first time it fetches. "git-log master" will tell
> > you (look at the git-svn-id: lines).
>
> Sigh. Another "surprise the user by an arbitrary looking choice that
> might possibly correspond to what he wants done because it something
> obscure in the commit history suggests so" design decision.
>
> I don't want my master set according to something that a coworker (or
> even myself) happened to commit last to.
>
> Please. git-svn is told how to find the trunk on its command line.
> Nothing makes sense (short of an _explicit_ wish otherwise for which
> it might make sense to create a command line option) than to map
> master to the trunk.
Keep in mind that command-line arguments for trunk, branches and tags
are _all_ optional to git-svn.
If only trunk or nothing is specified, the current behavior will always
be correct.
There's also a case if only branches and/or tags are specified, with no
trunk given. That would need to be handled, somehow...
I've also tracked several (both OSS and closed) projects that have a
policy of doing all work on branches with a trunk that's almost never
up-to-date.
Tracking the last-committed branch was the easiest to code, and we even
tell the user which branch they're on. I guess I could add a message
telling them all the other refs they can "git reset --hard" to if they
don't like their current one.
> As a design rule: don't second-guess the user, _ever_, and
> particularly not on decisions with large consequences. A tool should
> not have a mind of its own but do what it is told. And if it can't
> figure out what it is told, by simple, user-understandable criteria,
> barf. And of course have a way to _direct_ it when it can't figure it
> out on its own, or if the simple and obvious default would not do the
> right thing.
git-svn used to never check anything out and leave HEAD dangling. I was
happy with that, but I got a lot of user complaints from that, too.
--
Eric Wong
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-09-08 7:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-09-07 16:47 git-svn: Branching clarifications Russ Brown
2007-09-08 5:21 ` Eric Wong
2007-09-08 6:57 ` David Kastrup
2007-09-08 7:49 ` Eric Wong [this message]
2007-09-08 7:58 ` David Kastrup
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20070908074944.GC24166@muzzle \
--to=normalperson@yhbt.net \
--cc=dak@gnu.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=pickscrape@gmail.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox