On 2007-10-19 07:38:22 -0400, Theodore Tso wrote:
> Finally, one last question --- am I the only one who had to take a
> second look at the whether the arrow should be <- or ->? The
> question is whether we are saying "gitk is moving to include all of
> spearce/gitk"; but I could also see it stated that we are assigning
> refs/heads/gitk with refs/remotes/spearce/gitk, in which case the
> arrow should be reversed. Or maybe:
>
> ==> git://repo.or.cz/git/spearce.git
> * branch gitk := spearce/gitk (new)
> * branch maint := spearce/maint 1aa3d01..e7187e4
> * branch master := spearce/master de61e42..7840ce6
> * branch next := spearce/next 895be02..2fe5433
> + branch pu := spearce/pu 89fa332...1e4c517
> * branch todo := spearce/todo (new)
I think the reasoning behind the "foo -> spearce/foo" syntax is that
"(refs/heads/)foo" in the remote repository has been fetched to
"(refs/remotes/)spearce/foo" in the local repository.
I might be deluded, though.
--
Karl Hasselström, kha@xxxxxxxxxxx
www.treskal.com/kalle
-
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
