Hi Junio,
On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 10:29:43AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Michael J Gruber <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> >> I choosed to write "overwritten" instead of "updated" to make it clearer
> >> that it makes no sence to push into these branches from a different
> >> source. Should this be noted more explicit?
> >
> > "update" may be more Git lingo but I think either is fine. "overwritten"
> > makes it clearer this is not a repo to do development in...
>
> In a repository with remote.origin.mirror set to true, "git fetch origin"
> does not seem to prune a ref that has been removed from the origin. I
> think that is a design bug, albeit a minor one ("git fetch -p origin" can
> fix, but "-p" should not be necessary). A "mirror"'s purpose is to, ehh,
> mirror a remote so that local people can share it as a nearby copy.
>
> A wording that also implies this automatic deletion of a stale ref would
> be nice; "overwritten" does not exactly sound like that, though.
So you intend to change git fetch origin to remove stale refs, right?
Best regards
Uwe
--
Pengutronix e.K. | Uwe Kleine-König |
Industrial Linux Solutions | http://www.pengutronix.de/ |
--
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