From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 22:16:31 GMT
Subject: Re: Question regarding git fetch
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:

> > 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?

> 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