Marc Branchaud <marcn...@xiplink.com> writes: > OTOH, we shouldn't need to do any conflict resolution on these > "tracking" refs: The remote side should update the refs > properly. Nobody should make local changes to these refs. > > I guess I'm advocating that git should only allow "tracking" refs to > be updated by a fetch, or a successful push of a local, non-"tracking" > ref.
I do not think anybody is imagining new things to happen inside refs/tracking other than by fetching, just like refs/remotes/ refs behave like so. What I was discussing was mostly the step next to the introduction of tracking/. Some things are useful merely by existing (e.g. tags you got from remote, as long as you can easily refer to them, are useful to you). Some other things are cumbersome to use until you manage to consolidate your views with theirs in order to make collective progress, and they require merging (e.g. notes).
