On Tue, Aug 4, 2020 at 11:37 PM Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Tue, Aug 04, 2020 at 02:53:30PM -0700, Jacob Keller wrote: > > > This results in the annoying completion behavior where: > > > > $git checkout ma<TAB> > > main > > master > > > > Essentially, because both main and master have similar names, tab > > completion requires remembering to type one additional character than > > I am used to. > > Heh, I didn't think anybody considered that implication so far; the fact > that they were similar names has generally been considered a positive. I > agree it would be annoying. > > > I'd like to be able to customize my pull so that I either (a) exclude > > the reference when performing a fetch, or (b) exclude the reference > > when tab completing. > > Not quite (b), but if you: > > - delete any local "master" branch, if you haven't already > > - set $GIT_COMPLETION_CHECKOUT_NO_GUESS to "1" > > then it shouldn't complete "master". The second is necessary because > we'd try to complete the magic "git checkout master" that auto-creates > the branch from the remote version. > I don't like this approach because I like having the guessing options available in most repositories. > > something like adding a remote.<name>.excludeRefs which would allow > > specifying a set of references to exclude from matching the refspec.. > > > > I realize I could customize the refspec to list the set of things I > > want, but then I would miss any potential future branches until I > > updated my remote config again. > > This is definitely a reasonable thing to want, and it has come up off > and on over the years. One search term for the list archive is "negative > refspecs", though it turns up a lot of useless hits when the two words > are not directly adjacent. > > This old thread might be worth reading: > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/20140124090104.GA396@x4/ > > and there is even a patch in there: > > https://lore.kernel.org/git/20140125013433.GA22336@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > > but I didn't go over it carefully enough to know whether it is utter > trash, or something that could be used as a starting point. > Thanks, it looks like this is at least sensible. > -Peff
