Re: How is working on arbitrary remote heads supposed to work in Cogito (+ PATCH)?

From: Josef Weidendorfer <Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de>
Date: 2005-07-29 19:10:08
Hi,

On Friday 29 July 2005 09:48, you wrote:
> Petr Baudis <pasky@suse.cz> writes:
> > So, what do you mean by "clone" here? And what command should I use for
> > pushing then?
...
> Now, A may happen to be on my home machine and B may happen be
> on my notebook, meaning the owner of A and B are both myself.
> But even in that case I would still work by "pulling from A"
> when I am on B, and "pulling from B" when I am on A.  In other
> words, "pulling" is the only patch flow mechanism I would use.

OK, that is your opinion and your work flow. But porcelains perhaps would like 
to allow other work flows, even if it seems confusing for you.

And I think the problem here simple is that send-pack *forces* local and 
remote head names to be the same. This is forcing policy to porcelains, but 
GIT should be only about plumbing.

Perhaps the solution is to allow more flexibility in GIT.
What about introducing an additional environment GIT_REFS_DIR?
When using send-pack, the porcelain would set this variable to a directory 
containing a 1:1 name relationship to the remote repository.

Josef
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Received on Fri Jul 29 19:11:50 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-07-29 19:11:52 EST