Re: [PATCH] branch: do not attempt to track HEAD implicitly

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Thomas Rast <trast@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Martin von Zweigbergk wrote:
>> On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 1:38 PM, Thomas Rast <trast@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Silently drop the HEAD candidate in the implicit (i.e. without -t
>> > flag) case, so that the branch starts out without an upstream.
>> 
>> Thanks. This has been on my todo list for a while.
>> 
>> Should it only check for HEAD? How about ORIG_HEAD and FETCH_HEAD?
>> Simply anything outside of refs/ maybe? Would that make sense?

I was tempted to say "limit to refs/heads/ and refs/remotes/" but perhaps
people have custom namespaces defined in refs/ hierarchy and for some of
them the tracking may make sense.  How about ignoring the implicit track
if the ref does not begin with refs/ to cover the obvious ones like HEAD,
FETCH_HEAD, etc.?
--
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


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]