From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Miles Bader Subject: Re: renaming remote branches Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:51:36 +0900 Message-ID: References: <20090416065934.GA20071@coredump.intra.peff.net> <76718490904160609s1ef9c1e0m6f19ff169666fa3@mail.gmail.com> <20090416135037.GA7770@coredump.intra.peff.net> Reply-To: Miles Bader Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: Jay Soffian , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jeff King X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Apr 17 02:53:36 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 1LucKi-0000eX-Io for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 02:53:33 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755781AbZDQAvu (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2009 20:51:50 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755110AbZDQAvt (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2009 20:51:49 -0400 Received: from TYO202.gate.nec.co.jp ([202.32.8.206]:37962 "EHLO tyo202.gate.nec.co.jp" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753672AbZDQAvs (ORCPT ); Thu, 16 Apr 2009 20:51:48 -0400 Received: from relay11.aps.necel.com ([10.29.19.46]) by tyo202.gate.nec.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.4) with ESMTP id n3H0paEv003014; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:51:36 +0900 (JST) Received: from relay11.aps.necel.com ([10.29.19.20] [10.29.19.20]) by relay11.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:51:36 +0900 Received: from dhlpc061 ([10.114.114.58] [10.114.114.58]) by relay11.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:51:36 +0900 Received: by dhlpc061 (Postfix, from userid 31295) id 3C03852E274; Fri, 17 Apr 2009 09:51:36 +0900 (JST) System-Type: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Blat: Foop In-Reply-To: <20090416135037.GA7770@coredump.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Thu, 16 Apr 2009 09:50:37 -0400") Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Jeff King writes: > All of that is assuming that remote renames are common enough to really > care about. Personally, I've never actually done one. The use-case which prompted my question was "retiring" obsolete branches that exist on a public server (which is usually only interactived with remotely using git). E.g., a project has a long-term public branch "oink" which is finally merged to master, and thereafter ceases to be kept up-to-date. Sometimes the developers are reluctant to delete it becaue they want to keep the history around. However simply leaving it in place can be pretty confusing, as people tend to keep downloading it, not realizing how out-of-date it is. A nice compromise is to rename "oink" to "obsolete/oink", which keeps around the history for easy perusal, but makes the status of the branch pretty clear at a glance. -Miles -- Yo mama's so fat when she gets on an elevator it HAS to go down.