On Fri, 10 Jan 2020, Joel Brobecker wrote: > > No. What we want to ensure is that people don't accidentally create a > > branch called refs/heads/foo when they should (by our naming conventions) > > have created one called refs/heads/devel/foo or > > refs/users/someone/heads/foo. Our naming conventions mean that all > > branches in refs/heads/ should be called master, devel/something or > > releases/something. But it's easy for someone to get a "git push" command > > wrong so that it would create a badly named branch. > > Could you rely on the update-hook script for that?
We could, it just feels like "branch names [in refs/heads/] must match one of these naming conventions" is something fairly generic rather than extremely GCC-specific. -- Joseph S. Myers jos...@codesourcery.com
