Santi Béjar <sbejar@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > git-fetch fetches the branches from the remote and saves this > information in .git/FETCH_FETCHED, and at the end it generates > the file .git/FETCH_HEAD. > > There are two cases where the behaviour is changed: > > 1) branch.*.merge no longer must exactly match the remote part > of the branch fetched. Both are expanded in full (as refs/heads/...) > and matched afterwards. How hard would it be to fix this? I see this as a regression. If you are setting configuration, wouldn't you rather see the behaviour consistent even when remote adds new refs? > 2) When the remote is specified with $GIT_DIR/branches/... and there is > a branch.*.merge, the remote branch name must match to get them merged. > Before the branch in $GIT_DIR/branches/... was always merged. I do not think the current $GIT_DIR/branches/ support with respect to choosing which remote branch to choose was done with any deep thinking, other than to stay backward compatible, so I would not put too much trust in what is in the documentation. At the same time, I personally can be pursuaded to go either way, exactly because I do not think the current behaviour has strict reasoning behind it. However, I wonder how this change would affect existing setups people may have. Merging this at this moment would be a pain even if there were no downsides, as there are a few topics that want to touch parse-remote and fetch (two already in 'pu', and git-bundle series also wants to hook into git-fetch); these topics would need to get adjusted if this clean-up goes in first. - 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