Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes:
> Hmm. If we had the oft-discussed-but-never-agreed-upon shorthand for
> "the upstream of" then we wouldn't need a special merge option. You
> could just do:
>
> git merge %HEAD ;# (or git merge %, IIRC the proposal correctly)
I don't think "whatever _HEAD_ tracks" makes sense at the semantic level
(i.e. you don't do "branch.HEAD.merge") but a syntax for "whatever the
named _branch_ tracks" with "if a branch is not named, the current branch
is implied" (i.e. the one in parentheses) would.
It is an entirely different matter what the special syntax to trigger that
"upstream-ness" should be. I vaguely recall @{upstream} or @{u} were the
concensus?
--
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