"Bence Ferdinandy" <bence@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > so I've been wondering about branch descriptions being just a local > configuration. The only use-case I know for them is generating cover letters > and request-pull, although I could imagine maybe the maintainer uses branch > descriptions for storing the - well - branch descriptions for the "What's > cooking" emails and the merge commit messages. FWIW, that is not how I maintain "What's cooking". Rather, the next issue os "What's cooking" is pretty much edited manually, plus a tool that notices when an existing topic advances in order to insert these "(merged to 'next' on such and such day)" lines and turn '-' bullets into '+', and move topics from other sections to 'graduated' section. Especially when writing comments on a topic, being able to read about other topics (which may be related) and the list of titles helps a lot. There may be folks who find branch descriptions a useful way to keep a quick reminder about the branch. I was also hoping it may be like so, but I seem to have failed to exploit it as a useful component in my workflow. > Now my problem with the description being a local configuration, is that > I often work on patches on two different computers. I can easily share my patch > notes with myself, but not the branch description. If these could be pushed and > fetched like a note, I think that would open up some other nice possibilities > as well, like having a standard place for MR/PR messages for forges, sharing > proposed merge commit messages, maybe other things. If this is about draft work, I would use an empty commit at the tip of the branch. > For my personal issue of sharing branch descriptions with myself, I could > probably just make up a convention for myself, say using refs/notes/branches, > but it would be nice to have this built in, instead of the local config branch > description. > > From usage perspective I could imagine a new `--branch` flag for notes, which > would tell `git notes` to operate on notes attached to branches instead of > specific commits, probably stored under refs/notes/branches by default. Maybe > add an `--edit-branch-note` to `git branch`. And of course have the option to > use this note instead of the description configuration wherever it makes sense. > > What do you think? The notes tree is a hashmap that uses object names as the key. The point of a branch is that it can grow by accumulating new commits on it, or its commits rewritten with "rebase -i", and there are branches with more than one commit. So to what commit on the branch would you hang such a note on?
