Hi Junio,
On 18/10/2019 02:32, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.email> writes:
branch.<name>.merge::
Defines, together with branch.<name>.remote, the upstream branch
- for the given branch. It tells 'git fetch'/'git pull'/'git rebase' which
+ for the given branch. It defines the branch name _on the remote_,
+ which may be different from the local branch name.
While I do agree with the goal of make things more clear, I'd avoid
being overly redundant and giving irrelevant information (e.g. the
copy you have locally may be made under arbitrary name that is
different from the name used at the remote). After all, the users
do not even need to know about the remote-tracking branch to
understand this naming mechanism.
I'd argue that the user has to know about the branch <name> to even get
here,
and that the key value can be confusing (been there!), so improving the
understanding
was the aim.
That said, tedious repetition should be avoided, so I'll look to reword
it while still retaining the emphasis. Perhaps:
branch.<name>.merge::
Defines, for the local branch <name>, the upstream branch ref
_on the remote_ (as given by branch.<name>.remote).
The upstream ref may be different from the local branch ref.
optionally s/different from/ same as/ ?
Perhaps something along this line instead:
The name of the branch at the remote `branch.<name>.remote` that
is used as the upstream branch for the given branch. It tells
`git fetch`, etc., which branch to merge and ...
If this, should we also say it (the key value) is that of the upstream
branch _ref_?
Hmm, *thinks*, I think I'm being swayed by your version. Update to follow.
Philip
