Re: [PATCH v2 6/9] branch: display publish branch

[Jeff King <peff@peff.net>]

On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 10:05:15AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:

> As you can see; some branches are published, others are not. The ones that are
> not published don't have a @{publish}, and `git branch -v` doesn't show them.
> Why is that hard to understand?

Do you ever push the unpublished branches anywhere at all? If not, then
you would not have a tracking branch. E.g., git _would_ push to remote
"gh", branch "refs/heads/topic", but there is no remote tracking branch
"refs/remotes/gh/topic", because you have never actually pushed there.
So there is no @{publish} branch.

Or do you have some branches in a state where they are "pushed, but not
published"? It wasn't clear to me from your example if your "pu" or
"dev/remote/hg-extra" ever get pushed.

I do not use "git branch -v" myself, so I don't personally care that
much how it behaves. But I do use a separate script that does the same
thing, and I would want it to show the ahead/behind relationship between
each branch and where it would be pushed to (and as I said, I define
mine with refspecs). Right now it uses nasty hackery to guess at where
things will be pushed, but ideally it would ask git via @{push} or some
similar mechanism.

If the former (you do not actually push them), then I think the
semantics I am looking for and the ones you want would coincide. If not,
then I think we are really talking about two different things.

-Peff