Re: [PATCH] Only warn about missing branch.<n>.merge in pull.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Josef Weidendorfer <Josef.Weidendorfer@xxxxxx> writes:

> On Monday 18 December 2006 21:43, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> 
>> However, I would actually reuse our versatile (often hated?) config  
>> handling:
>> 
>> [branch "xyz"]
>> 	remote = blabla # this is the default remote
>> 	merge = master # this is the default branch for the default remote
>> 	merge = pu for remote second # merge 'pu' if pulling from second
>
> Looks a little bit confusing, but is fine with me.
> I even would remove the need for the word "remote" in the second merge line.
> Anybody using this has to look it up in the documentation, anyway.
> Because these options are not really self-describing.

I actually am in favor of Johannes's one, except that it does
look like you are always making a pentapus merge of pu, for,
remote and second branches into xyz ;-).


-
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

[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]