Kévin Le Gouguec <kevin.legouguec@gmail.com> writes:

> Kévin Le Gouguec <kevin.legouguec@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Tom Tromey <tom@tromey.com> writes:
>>
>>> Eli> Thanks, but I think we'd appreciate a reproducible recipe for this:
>>> Eli> how can one create a Git repository which can be used to reproduce
>>> Eli> this issue?
>>>
>>> This worked for me:
>>>
>>> $ cd ~/Emacs/trunk
>>> # This is my Emacs git repository
>>> $ git checkout --track -b vc-dir-bug master
>>> branch 'vc-dir-bug' set up to track 'master'.
>>> Switched to a new branch 'vc-dir-bug'
>>>
>>>
>>> Now invoke vc-dir on that directory.
>>

[…]

> Here's a patch.  […]

And here's another revision, addressing most of the points below.
WDY'allT?

> * the test should probably have a (skip-unless (have-git-or-something)),

Done.

> * maybe "none (tracking local branch)" is not informative and we should
>   ditch it,
>   * maybe we should fall back to "origin", like vc-git-repository-url
>     does,

FWIW, the current patch will show

    Branch     : vc-dir-tracking-branch
    Tracking   : origin/master
    Remote     : https://git.savannah.gnu.org/git/emacs.git

for my checkout of this work-in-progress patch, and

    Branch     : vc-dir-bug
    Tracking   : master
    Remote     : none (tracking local branch)

for a checkout made following Tom's recipe, and

    Branch     : trunk

for a fresh 'git init' with just a default branch.

OT1H "none (tracking local branch)" is redundant with "Tracking" not
being prefixed with "origin"; OTOH

* stripping "Remote" altogether might confuse users - at least "tracking
  local branch" hints at what's going on,

* Falling back to origin's URL might also cause confusion: users might
  then expect 'vc-pull' to fetch changes from that URL, which is not the
  case.

So all in all I think the above is reasonably useful.

> * rushed the ChangeLog entry; vc-git-test--run should also be declared
>   as a "new helper" (and maybe I should spell out that I used it to not
>   have to depend on vc-git-- internal functions),

Done.

> * maybe the new header deserves a NEWS entry.

Maybe?