From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Jan 2009, #07; Wed, 28) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:48:34 -0500 Message-ID: <20090129114834.GA10792@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <7vwscej26i.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090129035138.GC11836@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20090129113735.GA6505@coredump.intra.peff.net> <351A6988-32EB-473F-B6E5-8FBB38D91F88@ai.rug.nl> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Sverre Rabbelier , Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Pieter de Bie X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jan 29 12:50:07 2009 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 1LSVPI-0006Pu-MN for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 12:50:05 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753994AbZA2Lsh (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:48:37 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753838AbZA2Lsh (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:48:37 -0500 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:38758 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750988AbZA2Lsh (ORCPT ); Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:48:37 -0500 Received: (qmail 7462 invoked by uid 107); 29 Jan 2009 11:48:45 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.40) with (AES128-SHA encrypted) SMTP; Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:48:45 -0500 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Thu, 29 Jan 2009 06:48:34 -0500 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <351A6988-32EB-473F-B6E5-8FBB38D91F88@ai.rug.nl> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 11:40:42AM +0000, Pieter de Bie wrote: > This is true in all cases. If you create a new branch in any > repository, push that, and later do a 'git pull', you get that > message. I agree it's not the nicest way to handle things, but this is > not an issue with the clone, it's an issue of pushing new branches in > general. Right. I guess I was hoping by cloning an existing repository, even one with no commits on the branch, that we could somehow remember that we are "on" the master branch. I think that is what people who ask for empty cloning really want: 1. make a bare upstream 2. clone empty repo 3. create commits 4. git push / git pull, as if we had cloned non-empty repo And I know that it is not very "git" to talk about empty branches, since branches are pointers into the DAG. But we already do similar trickery with "yet to be born" branches by putting a dangling symref into HEAD. But I don't think there's any way currently to send those dangling symrefs across the git protocol, which is what would be required to do the above accurately. -Peff