From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Rast Subject: Re: [1.8.0] make two-argument fetch update remote branches Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 23:39:31 +0100 Message-ID: <201102012339.31684.trast@student.ethz.ch> References: <7vzkqh8vqw.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <201101312244.10047.trast@student.ethz.ch> <4D4875B2.4070008@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Junio C Hamano , To: A Large Angry SCM X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Feb 01 23:39:47 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PkOsy-000292-Pr for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 23:39:45 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751414Ab1BAWje (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Feb 2011 17:39:34 -0500 Received: from edge20.ethz.ch ([82.130.99.26]:56684 "EHLO edge20.ethz.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751221Ab1BAWje (ORCPT ); Tue, 1 Feb 2011 17:39:34 -0500 Received: from CAS21.d.ethz.ch (172.31.51.111) by edge20.ethz.ch (82.130.99.26) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Tue, 1 Feb 2011 23:39:25 +0100 Received: from pctrast.inf.ethz.ch (84.74.105.24) by CAS21.d.ethz.ch (172.31.51.111) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.270.1; Tue, 1 Feb 2011 23:39:32 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.5 (Linux/2.6.37-desktop; KDE/4.5.4; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <4D4875B2.4070008@gmail.com> X-Originating-IP: [84.74.105.24] Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: A Large Angry SCM wrote: > On 01/31/2011 04:44 PM, Thomas Rast wrote: > > > > Since the remote branches in some sense reflect the "last known state" > > of the remote, it would make sense to also update them to whatever a > > two-argument fetch got. > > If this is proposing to break: > > get-fetch ${REPO} ${SRC_REF}:${DST_REF} > > then I am against this since that form _is_ used and *is* plumbing. You're mixing up the two proposals. This one is to teach git fetch repo foo to update refs/remotes/repo/foo with the new value (maybe we should also have it update in the foo:bar case, but I haven't thought that through). The other one is to forbid 'git pull repo foo:bar' and would not change git-fetch at all. -- Thomas Rast trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch