On Saturday 19 May 2007, Wink Saville wrote: > wink@ic2d1:~/testgit-clone$ git-checkout -b test master > Switched to a new branch "test" > wink@ic2d1:~/testgit-clone$ git-pull . > Already up-to-date. > wink@ic2d1:~/testgit-clone$ git-pull . master > Already up-to-date. > wink@ic2d1:~/testgit-clone$ git-pull > Warning: No merge candidate found because value of config option > "branch.test.merge" does not match any remote branch fetched. > No changes. > wink@ic2d1:~/testgit-clone$ > > Why did last git-pull generate the warning, this seems wrong? Because git does not know what to merge; there is no config entry for "branch.test.merge", as the warning says. How would you reword this warning to make it easier to understand? But from your question, I assume that you expected git to have a "branch.test.merge" setting. What do you expect it to do? And why? Is my assumption correct that you want the last command to be equivalent to "git-pull . master"? And my further assumption, that you want this because you expect "git pull" to default to merging changes from its upstream (also when the upstream is local)? Creation of a branch from another local one never has created "branch.x.remote" or "branch.x.merge" entries. I am not even sure that setting "branch.x.remote" to "." is working in the current version. BTW: There was some old behavior of "git pull" to always pull the master branch from remote "origin" without any further parameters. I suppose that you did not want this to happen in your example above ?! Josef - 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
