Carlos Martín Nieto c...@elego.de writes:
From: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@dwim.me
We need to consider that a remote-tracking branch may match more than
one rhs of a fetch refspec. In such a case, it is not enough to stop at
the first match but look at all of the matches in order to determine
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 12:19 -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Carlos Martín Nieto c...@elego.de writes:
From: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@dwim.me
We need to consider that a remote-tracking branch may match more than
one rhs of a fetch refspec.
Hmph, do we *need* to, really?
Do you mean
Carlos Martín Nieto c...@elego.de writes:
... However, we now
have 'origin/master' and 'origin/pr/5' both of which match the
'refs/remotes/origin/*' pattern. The current behaviour is to stop at the
first match, which would mark it as stale as there is no
'refs/heads/pr/5' branch in the
On 02/27/2014 10:00 AM, Carlos Martín Nieto wrote:
From: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@dwim.me
We need to consider that a remote-tracking branch may match more than
one rhs of a fetch refspec. In such a case, it is not enough to stop at
the first match but look at all of the matches in order to
On Thu, 2014-02-27 at 11:21 +0100, Michael Haggerty wrote:
On 02/27/2014 10:00 AM, Carlos Martín Nieto wrote:
From: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@dwim.me
We need to consider that a remote-tracking branch may match more than
one rhs of a fetch refspec. In such a case, it is not enough to stop
Carlos Martín Nieto c...@elego.de writes:
From: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@dwim.me
We need to consider that a remote-tracking branch may match more than
one rhs of a fetch refspec.
Hmph, do we *need* to, really?
Do you mean fetching one ref on the remote side and storing that in
multiple
Junio C Hamano gits...@pobox.com writes:
Carlos Martín Nieto c...@elego.de writes:
From: Carlos Martín Nieto c...@dwim.me
We need to consider that a remote-tracking branch may match more than
one rhs of a fetch refspec.
Hmph, do we *need* to, really?
Do you mean fetching one ref on the
7 matches
Mail list logo
