Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > On Tue, Mar 03, 2020 at 09:51:07AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote: > >> > But unlike remote names, there's no default case for the remote branch >> > name. >> >> Up to this point, it is well written and easy to read. I think >> "there is no case where a default name for the remoate branch is >> used" would be even more easy to read. >> >> In any case, if there is no case that default name, I understand >> that explicit is always set to 1? >> >> > In any case where we don't set "explicit", we'd just an empty >> > string anyway. >> >> Sorry, but I cannot parse this. But earlier, you established that >> there is no case that a default is used, so is there any case where >> we don't set "explicit"? I don't get it. > > Maybe more clear: > ... > Yes, that looks fine to me. Thanks for a clarification.
