From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
To: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: config-glob-octopus
Date: Sat, 16 Jun 2007 18:43:31 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <7vtzt71hks.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706162039530.4740@iabervon.org> (Daniel Barkalow's message of "Sat, 16 Jun 2007 21:02:25 -0400 (EDT)")
Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org> writes:
> With this configuration:
>
> [remote "config-glob"]
> fetch = refs/heads/one:refs/remotes/rem/one
> fetch = refs/heads/two:refs/remotes/rem/two
> fetch = refs/heads/three:refs/remotes/rem/three
> [branch "br-config-glob-octopus"]
> remote = config-glob
> merge = refs/heads/one
> merge = two
> merge = remotes/rem/three
>
> It seems to me like "two" should be marked for merge, since "two"
> canonicalizes to "refs/heads/two", which matches the pattern and is
> fetched. However, current git-fetch marks it not-for-merge, and the test
> demands this.
>
> Shouldn't the value of "merge" permit the same shortcuts that the lhs of
> "fetch" permits, even if the matching fetch line isn't using them in this
> case? (And vice versa, for a canonical value of merge when the fetch is a
> shortcut)
I do not see much reason for that kind of complication.
Honestly speaking, I do not like the fallback that we use for
the third one (using the remote tracking name).
When you are righting down your configuration file, you are
doing so to reuse that entry over and over, so why not be
explicit for once and not worry about cases where the remote
adds ambiguous 'two' that is not refs/heads/two?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2007-06-17 1:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-06-17 1:02 config-glob-octopus Daniel Barkalow
2007-06-17 1:43 ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2007-06-17 3:28 ` config-glob-octopus Daniel Barkalow
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=7vtzt71hks.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.pobox.com \
--to=gitster@pobox.com \
--cc=barkalow@iabervon.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox