Re: Terminology question about remote branches.

[David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org>]

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> On Sun, Aug 05, 2007 at 01:38:07PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
>
>> > I believe the --track setup uses the tracking branches to figure out
>> > which remote/branch combo to track. To do it without a remote tracking
>> > branch, you would have to add the lines to your .git/config manually.
>> 
>> Fascinating, really fascinating.  Is there actually _anybody_ who
>> would not revert to phrases like "I believe" when describing git's
>> interaction with remote branches?
>
> By "I believe", I meant "I am pretty sure this is the way it is
> implemented, but I have better things to do than read through
> builtin-branch.c right now, so please don't take this as gospel and go
> read the code yourself."

Well, that is pretty much exactly what I find fascinating: that the
behavior is arbitrary and undocumented enough that one can't deduce it
either by logic or by recollection or by documentation, but just by
reading the code.

Usually code is supposed to implement a design, but here it seems
rather like the design, if there is any, is to be abstracted from the
code.

Maybe I get fascinated too easily.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum