Re: Git branching & pulling
- From
- Josef Weidendorfer <josef.weidendorfer@gmx.de>
- Date
- May 23, 2007, 09:49 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200705231149.43245.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vwsz05qcq.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
On Wednesday 23 May 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
Show 19 quoted lines
> "Wink Saville" <wink@saville.com> writes: > > >> Creation of a branch from another local one never has created > >> "branch.x.remote" or "branch.x.merge" entries. I am not even sure > >> that setting "branch.x.remote" to "." is working in the current version. > > > > I tired to create the appropriate entries and it didn't work, > > but maybe operator error. > > > >> BTW: There was some old behavior of "git pull" to always pull the master > >> branch from remote "origin" without any further parameters. I suppose that > >> you did not want this to happen in your example above ?! > > > > I expected it to pull from its upstream (i.e. the branches parent). > > While "I branched and that means I will always merge from that > branch" does not hold true for everybody, we do have an option > to make that easy to work in recent git. Look in git-branch > documentation and check autosetupmerge configuration option.
Ah, I stand corrected: I just checked - git already allows to default to even a local upstream for "git pull", not only a remote tracking branch.
Very nice.
What about making "git rebase" without arguments default to the stored upstream?
Josef