Martin Nordholts venit, vidit, dixit 18.06.2009 08:04: > On Wed, 2009-06-17 at 22:48 -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote: >> Martin Nordholts <enselic@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> >>> - is omitted, the current branch is assumed. >>> + is omitted, the current branch is assumed. Note that checking >>> + out a remote branch does not make it the current branch. If a >>> + remote branch is desired as start-point it must be an explicity >>> + specified. >> >> [...] "it" in the second new sentence is unclear. >> >> You probably wanted to answer "If I wanted to have _my own 'next' branch_ >> that tracks 'next' from the remote, what should I do?" > > What I am trying to clarify is that a remote branch will never be the > default for the start-point argument to git-branch, so if someone wants > a remote branch as start-point, then the branch must be explicitly > specified. > > For this, the first sentence might actually be enough. If a remote > branch never is the current branch, and if start-point defaults to the > current branch, then the start-point can never default to a remote > branch. > > Should we just stick to the first sentence then perhaps? > I think your usage of "start-point" is a bit unfortunate. What's a start-point? It's the commit where a branch forks off, or more precisely: the commit which the new branch's head is set to initially. So, the start-point is never a branch! Or else it would be a "moving target". If you specify the start-point using a branch name it's really the branch's current head which is used as the start-point. BUT: If you specify the start-point using a branch name the DWIMery can kick in and figure out a good default for the upstream branch (see --track). Michael -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html