From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: git remote update -> rejected Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:56:18 -0400 Message-ID: <20080422125618.GA27577@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1208857733.4695.37.camel@marge.simson.net> <20080422103458.GA14751@sigio.intra.peff.net> <1208861703.18689.2.camel@marge.simson.net> <20080422111113.GB11238@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Mike Galbraith , Junio C Hamano , git To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Apr 22 14:57:23 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JoI3j-00030L-0m for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 22 Apr 2008 14:57:19 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753567AbYDVM4W (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:56:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753489AbYDVM4V (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:56:21 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:3357 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753343AbYDVM4V (ORCPT ); Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:56:21 -0400 Received: (qmail 19593 invoked by uid 111); 22 Apr 2008 12:56:19 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:56:19 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 22 Apr 2008 08:56:18 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Mike wrote: > > > Thanks a bunch. I'll try it. I notice that origin and linux-next > > > already had + prefix. Presumably that came from the home repo. Dscho wrote: > It was a concious decision, but maybe it was wrong. > > My rationale was this: if I mirror another person's repository, I want all > the history. And I do want to keep it, even if the other person decides > to clean the original repository out. > > (In this case, the reflogs would not help, since I do not have a HEAD > reflog for all the deleted branches, and deleting the refs deletes their > reflogs, too.) Hmm, there is an inconsistency here, though, since we set it up one way on clone and another way on "remote add". Though if clone does finally become "init + remote add + checkout" that will resolve itself. Still, I think I prefer the old "+" behavior. We don't actually _delete_ branches, we just allow non-fast-forward updates. The reflogs will still be there. -Peff