From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Quy Tonthat Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-remote exclude Date: Thu, 18 Jan 2007 01:13:12 +1100 Message-ID: <45AE2EF8.50403@gmail.com> References: <45AA44D6.6080605@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jan 17 15:13:58 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H7BXz-0004ji-Qf for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 17 Jan 2007 15:13:52 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932293AbXAQONt (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jan 2007 09:13:49 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932323AbXAQONt (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jan 2007 09:13:49 -0500 Received: from pecan-mail.exetel.com.au ([220.233.0.8]:40755 "EHLO pecan.exetel.com.au" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932293AbXAQONs (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Jan 2007 09:13:48 -0500 Received: from [220.233.69.95] (helo=[192.168.64.35]) by pecan.exetel.com.au with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1H7BXs-00030R-TE; Thu, 18 Jan 2007 01:13:45 +1100 User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (X11/20070102) To: Johannes Schindelin In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.94.1.1 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi, > > On Mon, 15 Jan 2007, Quy Tonthat wrote: > >> "git-remote exclude" can be used to prevent one or more unwanted remote >> branches from being tracked. After, for example, >> $ git-remote origin exclude man html >> "git-fetch origin" will no longer fetch origin/man and origin/html. > > That is not what your patch does. > > It rewrites the "remote.$name.fetch" entries so that those branches are > not _updated_, but they are _fetched_ nevertheless. I meant to say "track", but somehow "fetch" got to my fingers. Old ages, perhaps. You are right, "update" is _the_ word. Thanks. > But then, I don't really see _why_ you would want such a solution. > After all, you are more likely to be interested in _specific_ branches, rather > than all branches _except_ a few. For different situations, there are different paths to choose to reach that ultimate "After All" (Zen? NO!). I offered one (little) path and expect to see more of bigger ones. That's the _why_ (and/or, the _why_ not). Quy