Josh Steadmon <steadmon@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: >> > @@ -121,11 +168,18 @@ int install_branch_config(int flag, const char *local, const char *origin, const >> > advise(_(tracking_advice), >> > origin ? origin : "", >> > origin ? "/" : "", >> > - shortname ? shortname : remote); >> > + remotes->items[0].string); >> > >> > return -1; >> > } >> >> When there is more than one item in remotes->items, this advice is >> _technically_ incorrect because --set-upstream-to only takes a single >> upstream branch. I think that supporting multiple upstreams in >> --set-upstream-to is a fairly niche use case and is out of scope of this >> series, so let's not pursue that option. >> >> Another option would be to replace the mention of --set-upstream-to with >> "git config add", but that's unfriendly to the >90% of the user >> population that doesn't want multiple merge entries. >> >> If we leave the advice as-is, even though it is misleading, a user who >> is sophisticated enough to set up multiple merge entries should also >> know that --set-upstream-to won't solve their problems, and would >> probably be able to fix their problems by mucking around with >> .git/config or git config. >> >> So I think it is ok to not change the advice and to only mention the >> first merge item. However, it might be worth marking this as NEEDSWORK >> so that subsequent readers of this file understand that this advice is >> overly-simplistic and might be worth fixing. > > Sounds like we should just have separate advice strings for single vs. > multiple merge configs? That sounds like a good idea if it's not too much work. Otherwise, a NEEDSWORK is still acceptable to me (but that said, I'm not an authority on this matter).
