news from the topic experiment

[Pierre-Yves David]

On 09/26/2016 11:26 AM, Denis Laxalde wrote:
> Jun Wu a écrit :
>> Excerpts from Pierre-Yves David's message of 2016-09-23 02:43:37 +0200:
>>> In the same way large organisation will probably want to define and
>>> enforce naming scheme for topics. But they already need to do so today
>>> for named-branch of git-branch. So nothing specific to topic here.
>>
>> For git, IIUC, Bob can create a "tidy" branch that tracks
>> "alice/smartfixup". He can also rename "master" to "@", tracking
>> "origin/master". So people can name local branches whatever they like. No
>> need to have a naming scheme to avoid name collisions.
>
> Some sort of automatic prefixing according to the symbolic name (local)
> of the repository a topic got pulled from would be very nice. There
> could even be some logic when switching to a "remote" topic (e.g.
> "alice/smartfixup") that would create a local topic (e.g. "smartfixup")
> so that the prefix would not get too invasive when actually working a
> topic.

The topic name is global and part of the commit, so it cannot really be 
"renamed on the fly". However we could do something at display time. But 
this might get a bit complex when one pull from many different path.

Something that would doubtfully improve the situation is getting remote 
name in core to help people identify whats come from where.

Flagging "owned" and "alien" topic is some important though. I'm not 
sure what is the best criteria, "which remote it has been see in?" "user 
involved"

Cheers,

-- 
Pierre-Yves David