Sean <seanlkml@xxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> David Kastrup <dak@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> A local branch is one with a local branch head. In contrast,
>> checking out a remote branch, while possible, leaves one with a
>> detached head.
>
> Yes.
>
>> "remote-tracking" basically means that git-pull will update the
>> branch according to changes in the remote repository.
>
> To be clear, it's the job of git-fetch to update remote-tracking
> branches with any changes found in the remote repository. Git-pull
> runs git-fetch and then runs a git-merge to update the
> currently-checked-out branch.
>
> When this happens, git-merge must decide which
> remote-tracking-branch to merge into the currently checked out local
> branch. You can set which remote-tracking-branch will be selected
> in this situation with the --track option.
>
> So assuming a remote-repo has two branches "master" and "branchX":
>
> git clone remote-repo
>
> will give us two remote-branch (AKA remote-tracking-branches) of
> "origin/master" and "origin/branchX". So:
>
> git branch --track mylocalbranch origin/branchX
> git checkout mylocalbranch
So --track does not set up a tracking branch, but makes a local
_following_ branch _refer_ to a tracking branch.
What happens with
git checkout origin/branchX
git branch --track mylocalbranch
git checkout mylocalbranch
? What if after the checkout (which leads to a detached head) I check
in a few things, and then decide to name the branch and set it up as
following a remote tracking branch? Instead of using git-branch for
setting up the following, do I have to explicitly add the respective
"remote" line (which does not specify a remote, but a remote tracking
branch) into, uh, where?
> No, a local branch is never a remote-tracking branch; even when
> created with a --track option. The --track option has muddied the
> terminology waters a bit and you're not the first to be confused by
> it. The --track selects a branch from the repo to merge by default.
Well, GOOD. I have already come to the conclusion that the "--track"
option, like the "remote" configuration recorded by it have the main
purpose of confusing people and should not be confused with setting up
a remote tracking branch, or referring to a remote branch.
> A remote branch and a remote-tracking branch are the same thing.
> Strictly speaking a local branch is never a remote-tracking-branch
> although the "--track" option makes that harder to explain.
You bet.
>> So the terminology seems fuzzy at the moment, and my attempt to
>> clear it up might not be the preferred way of doing it.
>
> Yeah, the documentation could use some fine tuning.
It is much too fine-tuned already. I think that first option names
and config file options need to get some coarse-tuning where one does
not have to split hairs and ignore the meaning of terms in order to
understand them.
I have now "following" or "automerge" local branches which are set up
to follow a "remote tracking" branch. Presumably, if I do
git-branch -b new-branch --track remote-branch
then I get a following branch set up which follows/automerges a remote
tracking branch. So far so good. What do I get with
git-branch -b another-new-branch --track new-branch
Does this follow/automerges with new-branch? Does this
follow/automerge with remote-branch?
What if I do
git-checkout remote-branch
git-branch -b new-branch --track
Does this follow anything?
--
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum
-
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
