> 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.
I understand. My fear is that we're discussing a lot of new configurations knobs. And from experience, they can start interacting between them, and getting every one of them to behave the way people expect them in all possible situations can quickly become a challenge. I was concerned specifically with the interaction with the naming scheme chosen for vendor and user branches, but I think we can make it work: One config to list the naming scheme for branches One config to list the naming scheme for tags I just want to be careful to also consider how all the options are interacting with each other. In this case, we were able to combine two requirements into one, so that addresses my concern. -- Joel
