From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: tracking branch for a rebase Date: Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:47:52 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <20090904135414.GA3728@honk.padd.com> <4AA124DD.1030208@drmicha.warpmail.net> <20090904181846.GC19093@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20090904185949.GA21583@atjola.homenet> <20090905061250.GA29863@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20090905140127.GA29037@atjola.homenet> <20090905142841.GB15631@coredump.intra.peff.net> <7vfxaz9wfi.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> <20090907084324.GB17997@coredump.intra.peff.net> <20090909104550.GA20108@coredump.intra.peff.net> <7vzl93cncn.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Jeff King , =?ISO-8859-15?Q?Bj=F6rn_Steinbrink?= , Michael J Gruber , Pete Wyckoff , git@vger.kernel.org To: Junio C Hamano X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Sep 10 09:46:33 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MleMR-0004wp-TT for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:46:32 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754101AbZIJHqT (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Sep 2009 03:46:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753382AbZIJHqT (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Sep 2009 03:46:19 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:52490 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752813AbZIJHqS (ORCPT ); Thu, 10 Sep 2009 03:46:18 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 10 Sep 2009 07:46:19 -0000 Received: from pacific.mpi-cbg.de (EHLO pacific.mpi-cbg.de) [141.5.10.38] by mail.gmx.net (mp026) with SMTP; 10 Sep 2009 09:46:19 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/DnWoxZtHDKYUAluKEiG5LFBgXb3zjjv8mYgURWK Xbr6WAON+nlm4L X-X-Sender: schindelin@pacific.mpi-cbg.de In-Reply-To: <7vzl93cncn.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.5600000000000001 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Junio C Hamano wrote: > I find a prefix % not descriptive enough (besides being ugly); if it were > "^branch", as some people said, it would probably have matched its meaning > "up", but that notation is already taken for "uninteresting". How about ^^branch? *ducks* Seriously again, I think that ^{tracking} (with shorthand ^t, maybe) is not too shabby an option. The point is: if we make this unattractive enough by requiring a lot of typing, we will never get to the point where it is popular enough to make a shorthand: it just will not be used at all. > When I say there is only one kind of magic notation for refs, I am > primarily talking about the end-user perception. @{time}, @{number} and > @{-number} all do their magic using the reflog, but that is about _how_ > they do what they do. End-user perception begins with _what_ they do, and > at that level, the magic consistently works on refs and different genie is > summoned depending on what is inside {}. > > The @{upstream} thing won't be using reflog to do its job, but that is > about _how_ it is implemented, and the end users don't care. Ah, I get what you're saying. @{2.days.ago} says something about this branch locally, but @{upstream} says something about this branch remotely (well, our local cache). From that view point, it makes sense. But my point stands: @{upstream} is too awkward to type. Let's have _at least_ a shortcut '@{up}'. Ciao, Dscho