Johan Herland <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > Although we definitely support and encourage use of multi-level branch > names, we have never conciously tried to give support for multi-level > remote names. Currently, they are allowed, but there is no evidence that > they are commonly used. > > Now, they do provide a source of problems when trying to expand the > "$nick/$name" shorthand notation (where $nick matches a remote name) > into a full refname. Consider the shorthand "foo/bar/baz": Does this > parse as $nick = foo, $name = bar/baz, or $nick = foo/bar, $name = baz? > > Since we need to be unambiguous about these things, we hereby declare > that a remote name shall never contain a '/' character, and that the > only correct way to parse "foo/bar/baz" is $nick = foo, $name = bar/baz. I know I am guilty of hinting to go in this direction in the earlier discussion, but I have to wonder how much more refactoring is needed to see if there is only one unique possibility among many. For a string with N slashes, you have only N possible ways to split it into $nick and $name, and if you see a ref "bar/baz" copied from remote "foo" but no ref "baz" copied from remote "foo/bar" (or you may not even have a remote "foo/bar" in the first place), the user is already very unambiguous. The declaration is merely being lazy. I am not saying we must implement such a back-track to disambiguate the user input better. I am wondering how much more effort on top of this series is needed if we want to get there (provided that the disambiguation is a good thing to do in the first place). -- 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