On 7/18/2022 3:35 PM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Derrick Stolee <derrickstolee@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> ... I think I should use "branches" here, but >> keep the name "--update-refs". The biggest reason is that it provides >> a nice parallel with the "update-ref" sequencer command. This command >> allows updating _any_ ref, such as lightweight tags in refs/tags/* >> or even refs in refs/my/namespace/*. >> >> The --update-refs option doesn't create the commands to update tags >> or refs in places other than refs/heads/*. > > I guess it would make the choice of "branch" the most appropriate. > > I was hoping that we can repoint refs in private namespaces that are > not branches with the option. But as long as the underlying > "update-ref" instruction can be used by advanced users, that is OK. I would like to keep the --update-refs name for a couple reasons: 1. 'update-ref' is the right name for the sequencer command. Having a parallel there is helpful for learning about the option. 2. We could extend the boolean '--update-refs' option into a more advanced multi-valued '--update-refs=<refspec>' option to allow advanced users to specify a ref namespace that they want included. Thanks, -Stolee
