From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: remote#branch Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 22:35:25 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: References: <20071015233800.6306e414@paolo-desktop> <20071016021933.GH12156@machine.or.cz> <20071016210904.GI26127@efreet.light.src> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Petr Baudis , Paolo Ciarrocchi , git@vger.kernel.org To: Jan Hudec X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Oct 16 23:36:17 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Ihu51-0006Cy-NO for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 16 Oct 2007 23:36:00 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965815AbXJPVfg (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 17:35:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S965803AbXJPVff (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 17:35:35 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:41866 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S965445AbXJPVfe (ORCPT ); Tue, 16 Oct 2007 17:35:34 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 16 Oct 2007 21:35:31 -0000 Received: from wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de (EHLO openvpn-client) [132.187.25.13] by mail.gmx.net (mp049) with SMTP; 16 Oct 2007 23:35:31 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/UAMtUHtXUvMuZ0C6udnB3gcUd3Ty57vzEJq5/UX yXZr8YYhF9CDyB X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <20071016210904.GI26127@efreet.light.src> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Tue, 16 Oct 2007, Jan Hudec wrote: > If it is a fragment, than "#" is the only correct separator and should > stay that way. You did not listen, did you? '#' is allowed in ref names. Therefore this character really would lock us in to only ever reference _one_ and _only_ one remote branch at a time. This might have worked for cogito, but it does not for git. So, I say it again, '#' is _out_. > If it is not a true fragment, than we might want to phase it out in > favor of something else. But I would strongly prefer staying within > characters allowed in URI (as per rfc2396). If you do that, "http://" would be ambiguous, wouldn't it? This would already reference an HTTP resource, and you could not embed refnames into the URL. > As for multiple branches, separating them with "," feels logical to me, > no matter what separates them from the repository path. On the other > hand given that neither ":" nor "@" is allowed in refnames, reusing the > same separator would make sense especially if git switched to either of > those. ',' is allowed in ref names, so ',' is out. Ciao, Dscho