From: Drew Northup Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 20:29:21 GMT Subject: Re: What's cooking in git.git (Nov 2010, #01; Tue, 9) Message-ID: <1289334561.9556.13.camel@drew-northup.unet.maine.edu> In-Reply-To: On Tue, 2010-11-09 at 21:19 +0100, Matthieu Moy wrote: > Junio C Hamano writes: > > > * mm/phrase-remote-tracking (2010-11-02) 10 commits > > - git-branch.txt: mention --set-upstream as a way to change upstream configuration > > - user-manual: remote-tracking can be checked out, with detached HEAD > > - user-manual.txt: explain better the remote(-tracking) branch terms > > - Change incorrect "remote branch" to "remote tracking branch" in C code > > - Change incorrect uses of "remote branch" meaning "remote-tracking" > > - Change "tracking branch" to "remote-tracking branch" > > - everyday.txt: change "tracking branch" to "remote-tracking branch" > > - Change remote tracking to remote-tracking in non-trivial places > > - Replace "remote tracking" with "remote-tracking" > > - Better "Changed but not updated" message in git-status > > > > Is everybody happy with this round? I'd prefer to merge it to 'next' or > > even 'master' and have further polishing be done, if necessary, > > in-tree. > > The version in pu is the right one (I have to admin I did not make the > task easy ;-), thanks. I didn't get comment for a while, so I guess > it's OK for next, or master if you want. I'm happy-enough with them. If I'm going to complain I can offer up patches and let people fight over those. ;-) -- -Drew Northup N1XIM AKA RvnPhnx on OPN ________________________________________________ "As opposed to vegetable or mineral error?" -John Pescatore, SANS NewsBites Vol. 12 Num. 59