On 5/11/06, Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org> wrote:
quoted text
>         [branch "origin"]
>                 remote = git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git.git
>                 branch master

This is confusing at first read -- is it branch origin or branch master?

quoted text
>    Anyway, the point is, I think our current .git/remotes/xyzzy files
>    actually mix two different concepts, and they also end up doing it
>    pretty badly. They _work_, but because of the mix-ups, they aren't all
>    that they could be, and it's fundamentally impossible to make them so,
>    because the mixup really is that "origin" means TWO DIFFERENT THINGS
>    (the local branch, and the remote that it corresponds to)

As you say, this needs to be explained/exposed better to the user.
Now, how about having one .git/config and one .git/branches file?
Different semantics, etc.

quoted text
> The .git/config file is _easier_ to edit by hand than the remotes. It's
> easier to copy-paste within one file than it is to work with two

Agreed, but I suspect repo config and branches config travel at
different speeds. Maybe what this means is that if this happens, we'll
start seeing a need for ~/.git/config and /etc/git/config to set
defaults (merge.summary=1 for all my repos, core.sharedrepository=1
for all the repos on this server) where I now I just mostly copy
.git/config around.

Does that make sense?

quoted text
> I don't see why this is hard.

Must be me... it's not the Perl part... I just do a lot of grep |
xargs | sed stuff in my daily git usage ;-)

cheers,


martin
-
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