Re: [PATCH] branch --track: code cleanup and saner handling of local branches

[Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>]

Hi,

On Mon, 9 Jul 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> > -static int get_remote_branch_name(const char *value)
> > +static int tracking_config(const char *key, const char *value)
> > [...]
> >  	/*
> > -	 * Try an exact match first.  I.e. handle the case where the
> > -	 * value is "$anything:refs/foo/bar/baz" and start_ref is exactly
> > -	 * "refs/foo/bar/baz". Then the name at the remote is $anything.
> > +	 * A remote.<name>.fetch value can have two forms:
> > +	 *
> > +	 * - exact:
> > +	 *
> > +	 *	refs/heads/gnu:refs/heads/my-upstream
> > +	 *
> > +	 * - wildcard:
> > +	 *
> > +	 *	refs/heads/ *:refs/remotes/gnu/ *
> > +	 *
> > +	 * try exact match first:
> >  	 */
> 
> It strikes me a bit odd if Daniel's remote.[ch] infrastructure
> does not give you easy access to this kind of information...

Yes, probably.  However, at the time he was sending that patch, I was 
already preparing the patch.  Besides, we can always go back and change 
the code, if you really want to pull in the remotes stuff into 
builtin-branch (as of yet, they are almost independent).

My vote is to have it indpendent for now, if only to fix existing issues.  
But in the end it is your choice.

Ciao,
Dscho