From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH] Implement git remote mv Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:52:14 -0400 Message-ID: <20081023035213.GA8396@coredump.intra.peff.net> References: <1224724704-12700-1-git-send-email-vmiklos@frugalware.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: Brandon Casey , Junio C Hamano , git@vger.kernel.org To: Miklos Vajna X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Oct 23 05:53:43 2008 connect(): Connection refused 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 1KsrGU-00087y-OZ for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 23 Oct 2008 05:53:39 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753393AbYJWDwT (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:52:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753182AbYJWDwT (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:52:19 -0400 Received: from peff.net ([208.65.91.99]:2697 "EHLO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752541AbYJWDwS (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:52:18 -0400 Received: (qmail 6156 invoked by uid 111); 23 Oct 2008 03:52:15 -0000 Received: from coredump.intra.peff.net (HELO coredump.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.2) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.32) with SMTP; Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:52:15 -0400 Received: by coredump.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:52:14 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1224724704-12700-1-git-send-email-vmiklos@frugalware.org> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 03:18:24AM +0200, Miklos Vajna wrote: > The new rename subcommand does the followings: > > 1) Renames the remote.foo configuration section to remote.bar > > 2) Updates the remote.bar.fetch refspecs > > 3) Updates the branch.*.remote settings > > 4) Renames the tracking branches. I can't help but notice that the word "rename" appears all over the commit description and in the code, but not in the user interface. Maybe "rename" would be a better name for the command instead of (or in addition to) "mv"? -Peff