Re: [PATCH] "master" should be treated no differently from any other branch

[Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>]

Johannes Schindelin wrote:

> On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> 
>> Wouldn't it be better to mention the id of the local repository too? 
>> 
>>   Merge branch 'master' of ssh+git://git.sv.gnu.org/srv/git/lilypond into 
>>   'master' of 'hanwen@xs4all.nl'
>> 
>> this would give more information when these commit messages get pushed 
>> to someone else.
> 
> And why not put your address and birthday in there, too?
> 
> Frankly, it does not matter. In my private git repository I see that I 
> often merged from this machine to that machine, criss-crossing often. It 
> does not buy me anything to even know _where_ I got it from.
> 
> Besides, the information you are most likely looking for is the committer, 
> which is recorded anyway.
> 
> The single most useful information in the Merge message is the name of the 
> branch I merged, since it is more often than not a topic branch, which is 
> aptly named.

By the way, I run git with merge.summary=true, and it is very nice and
usually shows the correct thing... but because git doesn't mark branching
points in any way sometimes under feature branch header there are changes
not related to given topic, but which were on given branch; the
fast-forward case I think.

That said, I'm all for not having "master" branch special-cased, besides
having it default name for branch in git-init-db.
-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git