On Thu, Oct 22, 2009 at 11:43:05PM -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote: > > But probably that is an artifact of the workflow. The scenario I am > > describing above implies a somewhat centralized workflow, where the > > shorthand contains all of the interesting information. In a totally > > distributed, we-don't-share-anything-except-the-url-namespace setup of > > an open source repo, the full URL makes more sense. > > > > So maybe it is something that should be optional. > > Surely you ought to be able to get the short form with "pull", though, if > you happen to like short forms. So it would make sense to decide how to > format the merge message based entirely on an option, not at all on > whether you use pull or fetch+merge. Yeah, I think you are right. It _should_ be variable, but right now it varies on something totally unrelated to what you want (how you invoked, and not what type of repo setup you are using). So I agree a patch to make it more consistent across fetch+merge versus pull would be good, and then we can make a configuration option to choose one or the other. -Peff -- 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