From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: confusion over the new branch and merge config Date: Fri, 22 Dec 2006 22:04:57 +0100 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <7vd56cam66.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Fri Dec 22 22:02:44 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by dough.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1GxrXL-00041C-Cc for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Fri, 22 Dec 2006 22:02:39 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751839AbWLVVCg convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Dec 2006 16:02:36 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752703AbWLVVCg (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Dec 2006 16:02:36 -0500 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:40763 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751839AbWLVVCf (ORCPT ); Fri, 22 Dec 2006 16:02:35 -0500 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1GxrX8-0002HC-2M for git@vger.kernel.org; Fri, 22 Dec 2006 22:02:26 +0100 Received: from host-81-190-25-107.torun.mm.pl ([81.190.25.107]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2006 22:02:26 +0100 Received: from jnareb by host-81-190-25-107.torun.mm.pl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 22 Dec 2006 22:02:26 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: git@vger.kernel.org X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-81-190-25-107.torun.mm.pl Mail-Copies-To: jnareb@gmail.com User-Agent: KNode/0.10.2 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Nicolas Pitre wrote: > On Thu, 21 Dec 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> No, the message says "any REMOTE branch" -- refs/heads/next is >> what it is called at the remote, and that is how the value is >> expected to be spelled; I think somebody added an example to >> config.txt recently to stress this. =A0The above error messasge >> obviously was not clear enough. =A0Rewording appreciated. >=20 > But wouldn't it be much less confusing if it used the local name for=20 > that remote branch instead? =A0After all it is what should be used wi= th=20 > git-merge if performed manually, it is what diff, log, and al must us= e=20 > as well. =A0Why would this need a remote name for something that is a= =20 > local operation after all? =A0I think "refs/heads/master" is really=20 > ambigous since you might be confused between the local and remote=20 > meaning of it, whereas "origin/master" carries no confusion at all. Perhaps less confusing, but also less powerfull. Current notation allows for pulling _without need for tracking branches_. Although I wonder if it is possible to have multiple branch..remo= te, and branch..merge always refering to latest remote (octopus if th= ere are more than one branch..merge for remote)... --=20 Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git