On Wed, 28 Feb 2007, Andy Parkins wrote:
On Wednesday 2007 February 28 14:53, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
As can be seen from my other messages, I'm experimenting a little with
git and trying to understand how its workflow compares with arch. Right
now, my procedure for branching off a remote archive is:
git checkout -b branchname remote/upstreambranch
git config --add branch.branchname.remote remote
git config --add branch.branchname.merge refs/heads/upstreambranch
Is there a reason why "git branch" and "git checkout -b" should not
automatically do the two "git-config --add"s when the source branch is
remote?
I can see why that would be handy, but I often make short lived branches off a
remote; and I wouldn't want my config cluttered up with branch defintions.
How about adding an option to tell checkout/branch that a tracking branch
is wanted (-t perhaps) - or perhaps a way to say that you don't want to
track the remote (depending on which is more popular)?
Certainly would be a nice feature to have ...
--
Julian
---
Meg Griffin: Somebody's in the closet!
Jeff Foxworthy: You know you're a redneck when your gun rack has a gun rack on it.
Stewie Griffin: You suck!
-
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