Marc Branchaud <marcnarc@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > I don't have any objection to the option per se. But I do wonder if there's > a need to add yet another knob to git just for completeness. Has anyone ever > needed this? It is not a good yardstick, as everybody has survived without it since Git's inception. The right question to ask is: would it help new use patterns, or improve existing use patterns? Two possible scenarios I can think of offhand are * using an empty refmap to ensure that your "fetch" this time is really ephemeral without affecting the longer-term configured remote-tracking branches * grabbing only a few selected branches out of hundreds, e.g. $ git fetch https://github.com/gitster/git \ --refmap=refs/heads/*:refs/remotes/jch/* maint master next +pu instead of having to spell its long-hand $ git fetch https://github.com/gitster/git \ refs/heads/maint:refs/remotes/jch/maint \ refs/heads/master:refs/remotes/jch/master \ refs/heads/next:refs/remotes/jch/next \ +refs/heads/pu:refs/remotes/jch/pu but there may be more useful scenarios other people can come up with ;-). -- 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