On Tue, Apr 09, 2013 at 04:18:52PM -0400, Phil Pennock wrote: > On 2013-04-09 at 18:47 +0200, Simon Ruderich wrote: >> Appending something like "-local-<ref>" is difficult because >> what's considered local depends on how Git is used. We could >> check "origin"/master but what if I call the remote branch >> "upstream"? > > At some point, the onus of work shifts to the person who is violating > convention. I mean, I might have used stty to remap intr to ^R. Most > tools are entitled to assume that intr is ^C without bothering to check. > Still, robust tooling might support the unusual. > > [snip] Hello Phil, Isn't that over-engineering for such a rarely relevant case? Most people who use a Git checkout (should) understand that local commits are not known to the rest of the world and that therefore the `git describe` output is not meaningful in this case. And everybody on the mailing list can use `git merge --contains` to check if the reporter's Zsh is based on a public commit and if not ask him to rebuild it. I'd recommend that we keep it simple and extend it only if it's really necessary. Regards Simon -- + privacy is necessary + using gnupg http://gnupg.org + public key id: 0x92FEFDB7E44C32F9
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature