On Fri, Jan 20, 2012 at 5:22 AM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > You however are misguided to say "Showing a short summary along...". It should have been "short status". > The branch description support is to give users a place to record detailed > explanation about a branch, similar in size to what you would normally > place in a log message of a commit or a cover letter of a series. There > wasn't any convenient place to do so for a branch that is (1) inherently a > moving target while it is being developed and (2) is not a good match for > tags and notes. I was thinking about that (and wondering if I abused branch.*.description), maybe we can have a similar convention for commit message, one short line, empty line, then more detail explanation. But branch.*.description is tied to format-patch/request-pull, maybe another config key. > There already is a good place for a brief summary and it is called "branch > name". Name your branches just like you name your functions. Yes, but it's not suitable for current status of the branch. -- Duy -- 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