From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [RFC] branch: list branches by single remote Date: Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:14:50 -0700 Message-ID: <20110816151448.GA5152@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <4E383132.3040907@elegosoft.com> <20110804040646.GA5104@sigill.intra.peff.net> <4E4A729D.9030906@drmicha.warpmail.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Michael Schubert , git@vger.kernel.org To: Michael J Gruber X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Aug 16 17:15:01 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 1QtLM4-0005vV-T5 for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 17:15:01 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751687Ab1HPPO4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Aug 2011 11:14:56 -0400 Received: from 99-108-226-0.lightspeed.iplsin.sbcglobal.net ([99.108.226.0]:49300 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751621Ab1HPPOz (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Aug 2011 11:14:55 -0400 Received: (qmail 3263 invoked by uid 107); 16 Aug 2011 15:15:34 -0000 Received: from me42036d0.tmodns.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (208.54.32.228) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Tue, 16 Aug 2011 11:15:34 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 16 Aug 2011 08:14:50 -0700 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4E4A729D.9030906@drmicha.warpmail.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Tue, Aug 16, 2011 at 03:37:33PM +0200, Michael J Gruber wrote: > > This isn't right. You are assuming that a remote called "foo" will have > > all of its branches in refs/remotes/foo. That's true under the default > > configuration, but technically speaking, the remote tracking branches of > > "foo" are defined by the right-hand side of foo's fetch refspecs. > > You are 100% right here, but... > > > So I think you want something more like this: > > ...the op still might want to filter simply by the remote name. That is a perfectly reasonable approach. It just should be called "--glob" or something, and not "remote". git-tag allows patterns to an explicit "tag -l", but "-l" is already taken for git-branch. > Reminds me that I have to resurrect my patterns-with-branches series.... Please do. I think it's a much simpler and more versatile solution to the same problem. -Peff