Andy Parkins wrote: > On Friday 2006 November 03 02:40, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> That is a change in behaviour and given that we introduced >> remotes for the explicit purpose of not to clutter the local >> branch namespace, I doubt defaulting to _show_ remotes is a good > > Really? I had imagined it was to prevent accidental checking out of an > upstream-tracking branch. Also; I don't think "not cluttering the namespace" > is the same as "not showing multiple namespaces". The local namespace > remains as uncluttered as it ever was. This is a question of what to > display. > > Assuming my "mixed mode" display thing were in place, doesn't that make the > two choices of UI > > 1) > git-branch : show local branches > git-branch --all : show local and remote branches > git-branch -r : show remote branches > 2) > git-branch : show local and remote branches > git-branch --local : show local branches > git-branch -r : show remote branches > > In case 2) the switch is simply selecting a filter, and so fits in with > the "-r" better. > I think it'd make more sense if git-branch could instead take a --filter parameter that does a simple strncmp(filter, branch, strlen(filter)) to see if it should show a branch or not. That way, "--filter=remotes" would work splendidly. "local" as keyword to "--filter" could possibly be a special case and need documentation. -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231 - 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.htmlReceived on Fri Nov 03 21:56:09 2006
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2006-11-03 21:58:05 EST