2009/11/5 Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx>: > John Tapsell <johnflux@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > "what the benefits are to give this information _in the 'branch' output_" > was what I meant. From the part you omitted from my message: I omitted it just because, imho, it's not what I 'care about'. I'm not trying to help advanced users (Users that _want_ to keep remotes/origin/* clean and users that _want_ to be careful to not lose commits are both advanced users, imho). I'm just interested in reducing confusion for non-advanced users. So either not-showing removed remote branches by default, or showing them but marking them as deleted. > A better approach to please the first class of audience may be to > introduce an option that tells fetch to cull tracking refs that are stale. > Then "branch -r" output will not show stale refs and there is no place > (nor need) to show [Deleted] labels. If it's a non-default option, then it won't help the non-advanced users. > Such an option won't be very useful for the second class of audience, > though. For them we would need something else, and it would likely be an > enhancement to "git remote". Which still leaves confusion when viewing "git branch -r" since they would show up there still. John -- 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