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: Andreas Schwab <schwab at linux-m68k dot org>
- Cc: Richard Biener <richard dot guenther at gmail dot com>, 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 14:26:26 -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> <55D72F12 dot 3060502 at redhat dot com> <87pp2gwvu1 dot fsf at igel dot home>
On 08/21/2015 10:38 AM, Andreas Schwab wrote:
Jason Merrill <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
On 08/21/2015 04:26 AM, Richard Biener wrote:
Can we limit the namespace one can create branches in? Like force all
branches created by $user to be in namespace $user?
git will create new namespaces for its own purpose in the future. If
you allow arbitrarily named namespaces clashes will happen.
I had been thinking of "namespace" as a subdirectory of refs/heads. But
now I see that there is something called "namespace" in git. Where did
you see that git was going to claim certain namespace names? git help
namespaces doesn't suggest anything like that.
We can't control what 'git clone' pulls by default.
close pulls everything below refs/heads by default.
Yes; my point was that you can't change that except with
--single-branch. But if we encourage people to use personal git
namespaces, then they won't be under refs/heads, so they won't be pulled