Hi, On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Jay Soffian wrote: > On Feb 18, 2008 7:14 AM, Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@xxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, 18 Feb 2008, Jay Soffian wrote: > > > > > -static int branch_track = 1; > > > +static enum branch_track branch_track = BRANCH_TRACK_FALSE; > > > > That is a clear regression. > > Perhaps. It's consistent with builtin-checkout.c though (which was > initializing it to 0). Who to believe? Well, in the way _you_ implemented it, it is a clear regression, since _your_ patch changes the 1 to a 0. > > Personally, I have no problem with typing "git merge <branch>" in your > > workflow. I would even avoid saying "git pull" for obviously-local > > branches, because I would have forgotten which branch it tracked > > originally. > > Um, well, apply this patch, set branch.autosetupmerge=always and then > branch.*.merge will tell you which branch it tracked originally. :-) That's what I meant. Rather than _looking it up_, and then saying "git pull", I'd do "git merge <branch>" _directly_. One command. Not two. > Aside, then how do you figure out the upstream branch is if you've > forgotten? Well, that's easy. I would look at the output of "git show-branch --all". But then, I usually do not care too much which branch I branched off, but which branch to merge with/rebase on. Ciao, Dscho - 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
