Re: RFC PATCH: support for default remote in StGIT

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

 



Hi Pavel,

This is quite related to the subject of the "Handling of branches in
stgit" thread I launched recently (Nov 30th).

On Sat, Dec 09, 2006 at 04:23:25AM -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> It's very important for me to have default remote support in StGIT.  I'm
> trying to track different Linux branches, and I don't want to remember
> what branch I'm on when I run "stg pull".

Right, that's the main problem with the current implementation.

> One approach is to leave the default remote selection completely to git.
> The downside is that StGIT prints the remote it's pulling from.  Now
> StGIT will have to print common words that it's pulling something.  Or
> maybe it shouldn't print anything?

It could just print a generic message and let GIT print out
the details.

> Also, git-pull doesn't allow to specify the refspec without the remote.
> This limitation seems artificial to me, but we have to pass this
> limitation to the StGIT users.

In which situtation do you need to pass a refspec ?  I thought all
necessary refspecs should already be part of a remote's definition.

> The positive side if that StGIT is completely unaware of the word
> "origin", and any changes in git handling of the default remote will
> propagate to StGIT immediately.

Indeed.


> The other approach is to calculate the default remote in StGIT.  This
> would allow StGIT to tell the user where it's pulling from.

Doing so would probably require to teach StGIT about every new way of
fetching a branch (we already have 3 ways, as outlined in my initial
mail).  OTOH, it may be the only way to present the user with a
uniform way of working, independently of the way we update the parent
branch.


Indeed, we may just want to distinguish whether the parent branch is a
remote one or not.  Then if it's a remote one, git-fetch already has
enough info to do its work updating the parent branch (whether using
.git/remotes or .git/branches).  If it's not a remote branch, there's
just nothing to do at this step.

Then, we just have to "pop -a" and move the stack base, without
relying on "pull".  That would also transparently give support for
branching off a non-forwarding branch (like git's "next" and "pu", or
like any stgit managed branch).  Would anyone miss the "git-pull" call ?

Best regards,
-- 
Yann.
-
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]