On Tuesday 07 November 2006 03:27, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> remotes/origin/next as "next's upstream". While we are on
> 'next' branch, we might want to refer to "HEAD's upstream".
>
> I am not sure what the syntax for that should be, though.
> Perhaps "HEAD@upstream"?
I remember an idea floating around was to use a virtual
branch "ORIGIN" which always maps to the upstream of the current
branch.
> Unlike the regular extended sha1 expression modifiers such as
> name~n, name^n, and name^{type}, it does not work with arbitrary
> object name; it can only work with a refname. Which is similar
> to the '@{time}' notation we added when we started using
> ref-log. Strictly speaking these should not belong to the sha1
> naming layer, but we can have them anyway for the user's
> convenience.
Yes, this makes sense. Branch relations like "upstream" is a
local configuration issue, similar to reflogs.
I vote for "HEAD@up", short form "@up".
Josef
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html