From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: gitweb and remote branches Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 14:07:13 -0700 Message-ID: <7vbqco91fi.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <200708300001.39203.jnareb@gmail.com> <200708301016.17552.jnareb@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: "Giuseppe Bilotta" , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jakub Narebski X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Aug 30 23:07:52 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 1IQrEv-0006Gl-OK for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 23:07:46 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932780AbXH3VHV (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 17:07:21 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932740AbXH3VHU (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 17:07:20 -0400 Received: from rune.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.210.124.37]:53845 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932617AbXH3VHS (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 17:07:18 -0400 Received: from pobox.com (ip68-225-240-77.oc.oc.cox.net [68.225.240.77]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by rune.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 322C212AFC1; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 17:07:36 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <200708301016.17552.jnareb@gmail.com> (Jakub Narebski's message of "Thu, 30 Aug 2007 10:16:15 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jakub Narebski writes: > That reminds me that gitweb has no support for detached HEAD as of yet, > although I don't think we want to encourage detached HEAD in public > repo. That logic is flawed, I am afraid. If you have been talking only about serving public repository via gitweb, then the topic of the thread becomes totally moot. Exposing or even having remotes/ in public distribution point repository would be even more wrong than using detached HEAD in public repository. Other people who interact with you should not have any business what you happened to have fetched from _your_ upstream --- if you want to publish them and act as a relay for your downstream, then they should be fetched from your branch namespace. But obviously people use gitweb/instaweb as a way to view their own live repository, and I think it makes sense to show and support remotes/ in such a case. It also would make sense to support detached HEAD there as well.