Hi Junio, On Fri, 12 May 2017, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schinde...@gmx.de> writes: > > > Git uses the config for remote/upstream information in favor of the > > previously-used .git/remotes/ and .git/branches/ for a decade now. > > The last time I thought about trying this several years ago, I found > that people who need to grab things from many places still do use > .git/branches/ and their use case is hard to migrate to .git/config, > primarily because the former is "one per file" and it is easy to > add/remove/tweak without affecting others. Ask akpm@ if he still > prefers to use .git/branches/ for example. > > Is it really hurting us having to support these old information > sources we treat as read-only? Well, you frequently complain about my patches, claiming that they place unnecessary maintenance burden on you. I would say that the .git/remotes/ and .git/branches/ code is a lot more maintenance burden than most of my patches. Also: I do not buy that it is hard to migrate from .git/branches/ to .git/config. All you have to is to call git-config (maybe twice) instead of pasting a oneliner into a file. I do not have akpm@'s email address handy, BTW. Ciao, Dscho
