From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: [PATCH] Git.pm: Add remote_refs() git-ls-remote frontend Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2007 19:13:23 -0700 Message-ID: <7vir6w5u4c.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> References: <20070825221143.6514.22516.stgit@rover> <20070830233749.4480.72281.stgit@rover> <7vr6lk5z2p.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <20070831013700.GL1219@pasky.or.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Petr Baudis X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Aug 31 04:13:52 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 1IQw19-0008OA-Ln for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 31 Aug 2007 04:13:52 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753865AbXHaCNa (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 22:13:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754622AbXHaCNa (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 22:13:30 -0400 Received: from rune.sasl.smtp.pobox.com ([208.210.124.37]:57743 "EHLO sasl.smtp.pobox.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753572AbXHaCN3 (ORCPT ); Thu, 30 Aug 2007 22:13:29 -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 05B1612B82F; Thu, 30 Aug 2007 22:13:46 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <20070831013700.GL1219@pasky.or.cz> (Petr Baudis's message of "Fri, 31 Aug 2007 03:37:00 +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: Petr Baudis writes: >> git ls-remote $URL 'refs/heads/*' >> >> would be the same as the former one. > > Yes, though subtly different, as I've already explained before - for the > case of say > > refs/remotes/evil/refs/heads Are you voting for removal of "ls-remote $URL 'heads/*'" support? I actually think removing it makes a perfect sense. >> Ah, that was the bug you were talking about on #git channel, I >> guess... > > *nod*