From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Felipe Contreras Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Apr 2014, #08; Fri, 25) Date: Fri, 25 Apr 2014 20:36:55 -0500 Message-ID: <535b0db7e5e31_ba2148d310f4@nysa.notmuch> References: <20140425231953.GB3855@sigill.intra.peff.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King , Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Apr 26 03:47:31 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 1WdriE-0002wx-9o for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 26 Apr 2014 03:47:30 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751220AbaDZBrZ (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Apr 2014 21:47:25 -0400 Received: from mail-oa0-f53.google.com ([209.85.219.53]:50647 "EHLO mail-oa0-f53.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751180AbaDZBrY (ORCPT ); Fri, 25 Apr 2014 21:47:24 -0400 Received: by mail-oa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id j17so5103413oag.12 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 18:47:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=date:from:to:cc:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=kw3gbtMSH5iFV2iaDeuD83G9+8VRxXbo4dnrBA6mwW4=; b=k3FwEaH1KALEOuKn8bwY8tEvx1Ab+mvJ3dI5OfZoVVWrbtZKYO8eRu6KPttzH6UARr wcK3f9TYu44glcLWI2gQTOoZM2te2t6BQS44hKhkXGrnQH4RPNywLI5vR7svm1SteZ8a bVI6Q/HV4hgcCbEFTPA26jp4/sNTDuLM+oPvXL2weJF2rXFG/dhiEVqr8cjpvEgFyMd4 LxlSISGH41lDpWTJWnc1aWlOAAHb8ObrglCDBOieU1MUnbI0T6wBvuMtpUzls4TMEdMd oNc2+ZQvDpZQZsB9CFj2jSHcKSoKm3/MfyTKJRwrGDnBDYnmo9yroVQ6uFFf2PkBoCZx FWOA== X-Received: by 10.182.29.225 with SMTP id n1mr9993276obh.2.1398476844468; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 18:47:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (189-211-224-40.static.axtel.net. [189.211.224.40]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id d9sm39148935oen.3.2014.04.25.18.47.22 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 25 Apr 2014 18:47:23 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20140425231953.GB3855@sigill.intra.peff.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King wrote: > On Fri, Apr 25, 2014 at 03:50:26PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: > > * fc/publish-vs-upstream (2014-04-21) 8 commits > > - sha1_name: add support for @{publish} marks > > - sha1_name: simplify track finding > > - sha1_name: cleanup interpret_branch_name() > > - branch: display publish branch > > - push: add --set-publish option > > - branch: add --set-publish-to option > > - Add concept of 'publish' branch > > - t5516 (fetch-push): fix test restoration > > > > Add branch@{publish}; it seems that this is somewhat different from > > Ram and Peff started working on. There were many discussion > > messages going back and forth but it does not appear that the > > design issues have been worked out among participants yet. > > If you are waiting on me, I do not have much else to say on this topic. > @{publish} as specified by Felipe is not useful to me, and I would > continue to pursue @{push} separately as "the remote-tracking branch of > where you would push to". I think there is room for both concepts. > > As for the patches themselves, I have not reviewed them carefully, and > would prefer not to. As I mentioned before, though, I would prefer the > short "@{p}" not be taken for @{publish} until it has proven itself. Presumably you want to save it for @{push}. While I'm not against to having just @{publish} for now, I'm farily certain most people would be using @{publish} and not @{push}, as that's what `git branch -v` would show, and it would be closely similar to @{upstream}. Therefore it would make sense to use @{p} for @{publish} -- Felipe Contreras