This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Moving to git
- From: Jason Merrill <jason at redhat dot com>
- To: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>
- Cc: Jeff Law <law at redhat dot com>, "gcc at gnu dot org" <gcc at gnu dot org>, Jakub Jelinek <jakub at redhat dot com>
- Date: Fri, 21 Aug 2015 10:00:50 -0400
- Subject: Re: Moving to git
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <55D61512 dot 8010002 at redhat dot com> <55D61B23 dot 3000309 at redhat dot com> <55D63403 dot 4000603 at redhat dot com> <CAFiYyc0MBF3SFa_UOvSK3YhTWWWSn4Q0J=P6TvedaC5pkd7NCg at mail dot gmail dot com>
On 08/21/2015 04:26 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
On Thu, Aug 20, 2015 at 10:09 PM, Jason Merrill <email@example.com> wrote:
ISTM that within that namespace, folks ought to have the freedom to use
whatever works for them. If folks want to create a transient branch,
push-rebase-push on that branch, then later remove it, I tend to think,
why not let them.
Well, I think that all public branches should follow the trunk model - if only
to make merging a dev branch to trunk possible without introducing messy
All shared branches, yes, but I think personal branches can be more
Can we limit the namespace one can create branches in? Like force all
branches created by $user to be in namespace $user?
So require some super-powers to create a toplevel branch?
And make [user branches] not automatically pulled?
We can't control what 'git clone' pulls by default. People can clone
with --single-branch to get just the trunk and then adjust what else
gets pulled, but I think it will make most sense for most people to pull