Re: [RFC/PATCH 1/2] remote tracking: return the tracking branch for the given branches

[Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>]

Santi Béjar <santi@agolina.net> writes:
> 2009/6/18 Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>:
>> On Thu, 18 Jun 2009, Santi Béjar wrote:
>>
>>> diff --git a/Documentation/git-remote.txt b/Documentation/git-remote.txt
>>> index 9e2b4ea..e444899 100644
>>> --- a/Documentation/git-remote.txt
>>> +++ b/Documentation/git-remote.txt
>>> @@ -17,6 +17,7 @@ SYNOPSIS
>>>  'git remote show' [-n] <name>
>>>  'git remote prune' [-n | --dry-run] <name>
>>>  'git remote update' [-p | --prune] [group | remote]...
>>> +'git remote tracking' <name> <branch>...
>>>
>>>  DESCRIPTION
>>>  -----------
>>> @@ -128,6 +129,12 @@ be updated.  (See linkgit:git-config[1]).
>>>  +
>>>  With `--prune` option, prune all the remotes that are updated.
>>>
>>> +'tracking'::
>>> +
>>> +Returns the tracking branch for the given remote (<name>) and branch
>>> +(<branch>). Note that <branch> must exactly match the left hand side of
>>> +the refspec of the given remote.
>>> +
>>
>> From that description, it is not clear to me if the branch is the _remote_
>> branch, the branch _on_ the remote, or the local branch.
> 
> OK. s/and branch/and remote branch/
> 
>> If it is the remote branch (or the branch on the remote), I wonder how you
>> deal with ambiguities, as I can easily create hundreds of branches
>> tracking the same remote branch.
> 
> AFAICS from remote_find_tracking (and some tests), it picks the first match.
> 
> So, additional text could be: In case of multiple matches, it picks
> the first one.

Why not have both:

  git remote tracking <remote> <remote branch>

would show all local branches that track <remote branch>, and have
<remote> as default remote, while

  git remote tracking <local branch>

would show <remote> and <remote branch> if <local branch> is following
remote-tracking branch.

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Poland
ShadeHawk on #git