From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Mar 2014, #03; Fri, 14) Date: Tue, 18 Mar 2014 00:40:16 -0400 Message-ID: <20140318044016.GA8240@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org, Ramkumar Ramachandra To: Philip Oakley X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Mar 18 05:40:58 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WPlph-0001tV-4a for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Mar 2014 05:40:57 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751077AbaCREka (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Mar 2014 00:40:30 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:41622 "HELO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1750907AbaCREkS (ORCPT ); Tue, 18 Mar 2014 00:40:18 -0400 Received: (qmail 20232 invoked by uid 102); 18 Mar 2014 04:40:18 -0000 Received: from c-71-63-4-13.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.63.4.13) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Mon, 17 Mar 2014 23:40:18 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 18 Mar 2014 00:40:16 -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: On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 06:30:49PM -0000, Philip Oakley wrote: > >* jk/branch-at-publish-rebased (2014-01-17) 5 commits > >- t1507 (rev-parse-upstream): fix typo in test title > >- implement @{publish} shorthand > >- branch_get: provide per-branch pushremote pointers > >- branch_get: return early on error > >- sha1_name: refactor upstream_mark > > > >Give an easier access to the tracking branches from "other" side in > >a triangular workflow by introducing B@{publish} that works in a > >similar way to how B@{upstream} does. > > > >Meant to be used as a basis for whatever Ram wants to build on. > > To me 'publish' didn't fel right, though the later 'push' suggestion felt > honest. > (http://git.661346.n2.nabble.com/RFC-PATCH-format-patch-introduce-branch-forkedFrom-tp7601682p7603725.html) FWIW, I think I like "@{push}" at this point, and we should perhaps add "@{pull}" as an alias for "@{upstream}" for consistency. -Peff