From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.176.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add branch.*.localmerge and documentation update Date: Fri, 08 Dec 2006 14:34:28 -0800 Message-ID: <7v1wnaggp7.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <8aa486160612081252t1e245104x58c8a6654d887af5@mail.gmail.com> <7vr6vagja6.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <200612082301.57037.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2006 22:34:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Santi =?iso-8859-1?Q?B=E9jar?= , "Aneesh Kumar K.V" , "Johannes Schindelin" , git@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org In-Reply-To: <200612082301.57037.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de> (Josef Weidendorfer's message of "Fri, 8 Dec 2006 23:01:56 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by dough.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1GsoIm-0007nf-Vk for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 23:34:45 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1761228AbWLHWeb convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Dec 2006 17:34:31 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1761226AbWLHWeb (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Dec 2006 17:34:31 -0500 Received: from fed1rmmtao10.cox.net ([68.230.241.29]:54971 "EHLO fed1rmmtao10.cox.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1761228AbWLHWea convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Dec 2006 17:34:30 -0500 Received: from fed1rmimpo01.cox.net ([70.169.32.71]) by fed1rmmtao10.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.03 201-2131-130-104-20060516) with ESMTP id <20061208223429.CVVV20715.fed1rmmtao10.cox.net@fed1rmimpo01.cox.net>; Fri, 8 Dec 2006 17:34:29 -0500 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.5.247.80]) by fed1rmimpo01.cox.net with bizsmtp id wNZs1V00S1kojtg0000000; Fri, 08 Dec 2006 17:33:53 -0500 To: Josef Weidendorfer Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Josef Weidendorfer writes: > On Friday 08 December 2006 22:38, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> "Santi B=E9jar" writes: >>=20 >> > On 12/8/06, Josef Weidendorfer wrote: >> >> Clarify the meaning of branch.*.merge option and add a similar >> >> branch.*.localmerge option, which can be used to specify a local >> >> tracking branch to be merged by default. >>=20 >> I am not so sure about the "localmerge" stuff anymore. >>=20 >> What convenience would it buy us (including but not limited to >> new people), and if there is any, would that outweigh the >> potential confusion factor to have two different configuration >> variables that do exactly the same thing whose sole difference >> is which side of the fetched branch namespace it uses to specify >> the merge source? > > I just came up with a concrete patch. > I am not saying that this is the only true solution. I admit that I do not use branch.*.merge and I do not know what people find lacking in what Santi did in late September with commit 5372806. What problem are we trying to solve (not a rhetorical question -- I am truly lost here)? Is it only a confusion between remote and local, or is there something that cannot be expressed with the current scheme? > Actually, Jakubs one with allowing arbitrary refspecs is nice. > The only problem is that it is not consistent which refspec > shortcuts otherwise, or? Actually I had a quite opposite reaction about allowing src:dst notation there. Does it solve any real problem? It is unclear to me. On the other hand, it gives a false impression that it can be used instead of remote.*.fetch to copy the remote branch into local tracking branch, and raises other questions such as what should happen when you have both, i.e. src:dst is given to both remote.*.fetch and branch.*.merge, and they do not agree. Which means it only adds to the confusion. So I do not think it is worth spending brain cycles talking about that particular one; it does not even have a patch to=20 implement it. But you have a concrete patch, and if it is fixing a real problem, then that is worth talking about. I just do not know if a problem exists, other than that people can get confused and write local tracking branch name by mistake when it should be remote branch name.