Documentation
-------------
-* Talk about using rsync just once at the beginning when
- initializing a remote repository so that local packs do not
- need to be expanded. I personally do not think we need tool
- support for this (but see below about optimized cloning).
+* No pending issues at the moment. "Revamp Tutorial" initiative
+ by Bruce Fields ongoing and things are looking better.
-* Maybe update tutorial with a toy project that involves two or
- three developers.
+
+UI
+--
+
+* Make "git branch -d foo" while on foo branch suggest "maybe
+ you want to go back to 'master'?"
+
+* Error message from "git checkout -b bar v2.6.10" should assume
+ v2.6.10 is an attempt to switch to a new branch based on
+ mistyped tag, not an attempt to revert path v2.6.10 from the
+ HEAD commit with extra "make and switch to this branch"
+ argument.
+
+* "git commit [-i|-o] paths..." with misspelled paths would be
+ silently ignored. Add a flag to ls-files to catch unmatched
+ pathspec to prevent this.
Design issues
-------------
+* Rehash "git commit" with various parameters to be more
+ intuitive without breaking traditinal users too much. We need
+ to phase this in, especially if we are going to change "git
+ commit" to imply the current "git commit -a" behaviour.
+
+* "intent to add" index entries.
+
* Plug-in file-level merges. On the other hand, we may not even
need this; just tell people to run "xxdiff -U" on the working
tree files.
-* Ref namespace management. Perhaps use refs/local/ suggestion
- by Linus. [Does not seem to be high on people's priority list,
- and not interested myself. People can resurrect this
- discussion if they want.]
+* Doing a merge in a separate directory.
+
+* Make 'format-patch' take revision limiters similar to
+ rev-list. For example:
-* Perhaps "everything in config file"? Especially remotes/
- shortcuts. I am modestly negative about this.
+ A C
+ ....---x---o---o---x---o---o
+ /
+ /
+ /
+ ....---x---o---o
+ B
+
+ we should be able to format commits 'o', without duplicates,
+ by:
+
+ $ git format-patch ^A ^B C
+
+ Currently the closest approximation is
+
+ $ git format-patch A..C B..C
+
+ which results in the last two commits including C formatted
+ twice.
Technical (heavier)
Technical (milder)
------------------
-* send-pack/receive-pack protocol updates, to allow the receiver
- to report what it did to the ref update requests.
+* "git status -v" to give commit preview.
-* Perhaps a smarter HTTP anonymous download via CGI.
+* Subprojects. I think the "bind commit" approach has been
+ outlined at sufficiently detailed level. Maybe find time to
+ actually start prototyping it?
+
+ <7vacdzkww3.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
-* Prepare to enable "always use symbolic refs for HEAD" patch.
- We need a timeline to force Porcelains to get ready. Last
- time I looked at them I got an impression that gitweb was not
- ready.
+* Shallow clones.
-* Forbid/ignore pack names that do not conform to the convention
- sha1_pack_name() assumes and reject in check_packed_git_idx()
- [In pu]
+* Mark entries as "assume unchanged" in the index.
-* strip leading directory from ls-tree output, to match ls-files
- output.
+ <Pine.LNX.4.64.0601311807470.7301@g5.osdl.org>
- I am of two minds about this one. diff output must always be
- -p1 format no matter where the command was started, and
- ls-tree might be easier to use if it matched diff, not
- ls-files.
+ A config item '[core] trust_stat = false' would cause to:
- [We should not do this, or do this carefully, if we were to
- merge the "git-checkout (--|<tree>) <path> work from
- subdirectory" patch.]
+ - "update-index" with or without --add would mark the path
+ valid after registering. Should we make the working tree
+ file read-only at this point?
-* Any Porcelain-ish we forgot or punted to make usable from
- subdirectory? I think the last pass caught everything and
- what are remaining are whole-tree or whole repository
- operations.
+ - checkout-index -u would mark the path and makes the working
+ tree file read-only.
+
+ - read-tree without -u would mark the path invalid.
+
+ - update-index --refresh should *not* mark up-to-date paths valid.
+
+ Impacts to various commands:
+
+ - update-index --refresh would ignore them.
+
+ - diff-files would say unchanged.
+
+ - diff-index without --cached acts the same way as diff-index
+ --cached.
+
+* Decide what to do about rebase applied to merged head. One
+ extreme is to allow rebase if "rev-list ours..theirs" gives
+ anything. This loosens the current merge-base based approach.
+ The other extreme is to refuse rebase if "rev-list
+ theirs..ours" contains any merge commit, which was discussed
+ on the list.
+
+ <43CC695E.2020506@codeweavers.com>
+
+* Decide what the right thing to do upon an empty merge commit,
+ when both branches happen to have obtained the same set of
+ changes through different history. Not recording such keeps
+ the history simpler, and the next merge would soon create a
+ true merge commit anyway, but this does not feel quite right.
+
+ <20060114021800.4688.qmail@web31803.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
+
+* Perhaps a smarter HTTP anonymous download via CGI.
* diff stopping at the first output; qgit wants to know if this
tree has any A or D from the other tree and nothing else.
* daemon --strict-symlink.
+* daemon --base-path does not apply automatically to whitelist
+ somehow feels wrong. If somebody cares enough, accept
+ patches.
+
* Perhaps detect cloning request in upload-pack and cache the
result for next cloning request until any of our refs change.
* Perhaps accept patch to optionally allow '--fuzz' in
- 'git-apply'.
+ 'git-apply'. am/applymbox is _not_ the place to do it.
* Allow 'git apply' to accept GNU diff 2.7 output that forgets
to say '\No newline' if both input ends with incomplete
Technical (trivial)
-------------------
-* Versioning scheme. The next maintenance installment will be
- 1.0.3 not 1.0.0c. The next feature release would be 1.1.0.
-
-* Either drop supporting Debian myself or coerce patches out of
- the official maintainer.
+* git-proxy should be spawned with sh -c 'command' $1 $2.
-* We would want test scripts for the relative directory path
- stuff Linus has been working on. Most of the C-level
- commands should be usable with relative directory paths.
+* test scripts for the relative directory path stuff.
* In a freshly created empty repository, `git fetch foo:bar`
works OK, but `git checkout bar` afterwards does not (missing
projects / git.git / blobdiff