From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: sean Subject: Re: Implementing branch attributes in git config Date: Sun, 7 May 2006 21:44:29 -0400 Message-ID: References: <1147037659.25090.25.camel@dv> <1147048587.17371.13.camel@dv> <7vfyjli9vf.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Mon May 08 03:49:36 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FcusS-0007iV-C6 for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Mon, 08 May 2006 03:49:36 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932237AbWEHBtd (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 May 2006 21:49:33 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932251AbWEHBtd (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 May 2006 21:49:33 -0400 Received: from bayc1-pasmtp07.bayc1.hotmail.com ([65.54.191.167]:23381 "EHLO BAYC1-PASMTP07.BAYC1.HOTMAIL.COM") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932237AbWEHBtc (ORCPT ); Sun, 7 May 2006 21:49:32 -0400 X-Originating-IP: [69.156.138.66] X-Originating-Email: [seanlkml@sympatico.ca] Received: from linux1.attic.local ([69.156.138.66]) by BAYC1-PASMTP07.BAYC1.HOTMAIL.COM over TLS secured channel with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Sun, 7 May 2006 18:52:36 -0700 Received: from guru.attic.local (guru.attic.local [10.10.10.28]) by linux1.attic.local (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F416644C28; Sun, 7 May 2006 21:49:31 -0400 (EDT) To: Johannes Schindelin Message-Id: <20060507214429.623905a6.seanlkml@sympatico.ca> In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 2.0.4 (GTK+ 2.8.15; i386-redhat-linux-gnu) X-OriginalArrivalTime: 08 May 2006 01:52:37.0062 (UTC) FILETIME=[14E55660:01C67242] Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 8 May 2006 03:45:47 +0200 (CEST) Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, 7 May 2006, sean wrote: > > > Not worth it. Branch names should be alnums and imho should be > > case sensitive too. > > Why should they be case sensitive? So you have a branch "origin" and > another named "Origin" and get totally confused? > I don't care either way, just think we should be consistent. Currently we support case sensitivity in branch names and let people get totally confused. But in practice people don't really get confused by the linux filesystem which is case sensitive. Sean