Re: Question regarding git fetch
- From
Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
- Date
- Aug 27, 2009, 22:16 UTC
- Message-ID
- <20090827221631.GA7058@coredump.intra.peff.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <32541b130908271512h255834adl5a606054f6ab20e4@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 10:12:50PM +0000, Avery Pennarun wrote:
Show 5 quoted lines
> > I'm still screwed. The issue is that you consider your configured > > refspec destinations to be precious, and not merely a cache for what's > > happening on the remote side. > > Is the "precious remote ref" concept perhaps an imaginary one?
Maybe. I certainly don't use it. But I am trying to consider corner cases where somebody who _isn't_ me is going to get screwed by a change we make.
> After all, if I *really* care about the prior state of the remote, I > can just make it a remote branch. And if (as often happens) I just
Do you mean "local branch" here?
Show 7 quoted lines
> want to know what's new in that ref since last time I merged, it's > simply > > git log master..origin/master > > This works even if master has extra commits vs. origin/master, since > the double-dot invokes git-merge-base.
Well, ".." doesn't use git-merge-base. But yes, I actually do this, except I do:
gitk master...origin/master
-Peff