Re: confusion over the new branch and merge config

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

 



On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 01:51:03AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:

> If you (or other people) use branch.*.merge, with its value set
> to remote name _and_ local name, and actually verify that either
> form works without confusion, please report back and I'll apply.

This [using tracking branches in branch.*.merge] seems to be working for
me, but it is possible to get some confusing results with it. Try this
config:

[remote "origin"]
  url = /my/other/git/repo
  fetch = refs/heads/master:refs/heads/origin
  fetch = refs/heads/origin:refs/heads/junio
[branch "master"]
  remote = origin
  merge = refs/heads/origin

That is, we have a local tracking branch 'X' which has the same name as
a remote branch 'X'. When we fetch, both will be marked for merge in
FETCH_HEAD, and git-pull will attempt to do an octopus.

Is this too convoluted a config to worry about (no, I don't actually do
this in my repository -- I just constructed the most plausible reason I
could think of for having conflicting names). I actually think having a
branch.*.mergelocal would make just as much sense and would be more
robust (plus, it should be safe and sensible for "git-checkout -b foo
bar" to point branch.foo.mergelocal to refs/heads/bar).

-Peff
-
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]