From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 12:14:09 GMT
Subject: Re: Terminology question about remote branches.
Message-ID: <20070805121409.GA19885@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <85fy2y89kb.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>

On Sun, Aug 05, 2007 at 02:12:04PM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:

> Well, that is pretty much exactly what I find fascinating: that the
> behavior is arbitrary and undocumented enough that one can't deduce it
> either by logic or by recollection or by documentation, but just by
> reading the code.

I see your point, but I think you are reading too much into my words. I
am 99% sure that is the way it works (because it would make no sense to
work any other way, and that is my mental model of how it works), but I
am very hesitant to state something outright which I haven't
double-checked in the code. Thus I used weak language.

-Peff