From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Local clone checks out wrong branch based on remote HEAD Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:40:26 -0700 Message-ID: <7viqm7pvkl.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Tom Preston-Werner , git@vger.kernel.org To: Daniel Barkalow X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Mar 18 00:42:08 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Ljiv8-0008WL-N6 for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Wed, 18 Mar 2009 00:42:07 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752353AbZCQXkf (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:40:35 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752099AbZCQXkf (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:40:35 -0400 Received: from a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([207.106.133.19]:54310 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751450AbZCQXke (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:40:34 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5071EA2608; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:40:32 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pobox.com (unknown [68.225.240.211]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by a-sasl-fastnet.sasl.smtp.pobox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1B884A2605; Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:40:27 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Daniel Barkalow's message of "Tue, 17 Mar 2009 15:39:55 -0400 (EDT)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Pobox-Relay-ID: 014F17A8-134D-11DE-86F3-CFA5EBB1AA3C-77302942!a-sasl-fastnet.pobox.com Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Daniel Barkalow writes: > ... I think there's also been discussion of a > protocol extension to transmit the information, although I don't know > where that ended up. You can find them in the list of threads posted nearby. The first round's protocol extension was not quite backward compatible but in a benign way, in that it did not break anything but induced a harmless warning from older ls-remote. The second round did not have such flaw but it got a "Yuck". From: Jeff King Date: Mon, 1 Dec 2008 12:44:15 -0500 Message-ID: <20081201174414.GA22185@coredump.intra.peff.net> Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6 (v2)] upload-pack: send the HEAD information I somehow feel that the "Yuck" was addressed not to the patches but to the problem the patch needs to address. We could resurrect it if somebody is interested.