On Thu, Nov 05, 2009 at 05:05:50PM +0900, John Tapsell wrote: > 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. Maybe, if your users want to know "what branches does the remote repo have" instead of "what branches does my 'image' of the remote repo has", just teach them to run git remote show origin instead of git branch -r origin as mentioned earlier by Junio? Of course, users would still need to realize the actual meaning of the commands and the fact that Git _does_ keep a distinctive 'image of remote repository', so this may not be the most intuitive solution. -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis A lot of people have my books on their bookshelves. That's the problem, they need to read them. -- Don Knuth -- 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