Hi, On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Josef Weidendorfer wrote: > On Thursday 07 December 2006 00:23, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Josef Weidendorfer wrote: > > > > > On Wednesday 06 December 2006 13:07, Andy Parkins wrote: > > > > The [branch "master"] section is such that there is no change to the > > > > functionality of git-pull, but that functionality is now explicitly > > > > documented. > > > > > > Nice. However, changing "git-clone" for this is an adhoc solution and > > > looks wrong. > > > > Not to me. There is _no_ other place to put this, if you want to help > > people graps the concept of branch.*.merge. > > As far as I understand, git-clone defaults to kind of a mirror operation > while changing remotes ref names slightly as tracking branches, and > afterwards, it sets up a local branch for development, which is > branched off from the branch which tracks remote's master. Yes. And I should back off from my strong language: I think this git-clone the most obvious program to set branch.master.merge. It should make life easier for new Git users. Ciao, Dscho - 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