Re: [PATCH v4] branch: add flags and config to inherit tracking

From: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>
To: Josh Steadmon <steadmon@google.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, gitster@pobox.com, chooglen@google.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] branch: add flags and config to inherit tracking
Date: Wed, 01 Dec 2021 10:11:03 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <211201.86tufsbsfc.gmgdl@evledraar.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <YaaYyFhDrvEbenWa@google.com>

On Tue, Nov 30 2021, Josh Steadmon wrote:

> On 2021.11.19 07:47, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason wrote:
>> 
>> On Tue, Nov 16 2021, Josh Steadmon wrote:
>> 
>> > I've addressed Glen's feedback from V3. However, this brings up a new
>> > issue that was not obvious before: "branch.<name>.merge" can be
>> > specified more than once. On the other hand, the existing tracking setup
>> > code supports only a single merge entry. For now I'm defaulting to use
>> > the first merge entry listed in the branch struct, but I'm curious what
>> > people think the best solution would be. This may be another point in
>> > favor of Ævar's suggestion to reuse the copy-branch-config machinery.
>> 
>> I haven't looked in any detail now at the "should we copy the config?"
>> questions. Just some quick comments/nits below:
>
> Thanks for the comments. They're all fixed in V5, which I'll be sending
> out soon.
>
> [snip]

Thanks, happy that it helped.

>> > @@ -632,8 +632,10 @@ int cmd_branch(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>> >  		OPT__VERBOSE(&filter.verbose,
>> >  			N_("show hash and subject, give twice for upstream branch")),
>> >  		OPT__QUIET(&quiet, N_("suppress informational messages")),
>> > -		OPT_SET_INT('t', "track",  &track, N_("set up tracking mode (see git-pull(1))"),
>> > -			BRANCH_TRACK_EXPLICIT),
>> > +		OPT_CALLBACK_F('t', "track",  &track, "direct|inherit",
>> > +			N_("set up tracking mode (see git-pull(1))"),
>> 
>> Hrm, should we say "git help pull" here, on just not reference it at all
>> and have a linkgit:git-pull[1]?
>> 
>> Or maybe git-branch.txt and git-pull.txt should be including a template?
>> As we do with Documentation/rev-list-options.txt, then this
>> cross-reference wouldn't be needed.
>
> Yeah, there's nothing really helpful in git-pull(1) about "--track"
> that's easily searchable (i.e. without reading it all straight through),
> so I just removed the pointer in the option help string, add added
> linkgit:git-pull(1) and linkgit:git-config(1) to git-branch.txt.
>
> I briefly looked at writing a common template for both git-branch.txt
> and git-pull.txt but I feel like the git-pull discussion of tracking is
> so spread out in that doc that it would require a significant rewrite to
> make a common template work.

*nod*. I didn't look into if it was easy/doable, just a hint in case
that direction was fruitful. Makes sense.