Re: Document clone of clone loosing branches?
- From
- Vaclav Hanzl <hanzl@noel.feld.cvut.cz>
- Date
- Jun 15, 2008, 07:18 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20080615.091827.74736349.hanzl@noel.feld.cvut.cz>
- In-Reply-To
- <7vr6azfyov.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org>
> These fall into "quibbling" category, but that judgement can only be made > by people who know the history.
I allowed myself to quibble much more than usually as I think it serves a good technical purpose. I am a new git user but quite pervasive in getting all the info I can (I have bound copy of all git man pages and about ten tutorials, diligently devoting much of my time last month to reading it all; generally I am not scared by strange things like plain Tex, FORTH, Prolog etc.) so I might serve as a good example of user who tried hard and still did not get it with current docs.
But it is a thin border, so please do not hesitate to shut me up if my judgement of technical merit is wrong.
> Updates to glossary and other introductory documents might be necessary. > For example, the entry about "tracking branch" in the glossary still talks > about the ancient convention of copying 'master' to 'origin' as a regular > branch:
I would appreciate this update ;-)
Regards (and big thanks for git!),
Vaclav