From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 07:47:59 GMT
Subject: Re: [RFC] pull/fetch rename
Message-ID: <20091021074759.GB13531@coredump.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <20091021074522.GA13531@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 03:45:22AM -0400, Jeff King wrote:

> Declaring it a failure depends on what you consider the goal of "git
> remote update" to be. I find it very useful as a shorthand for "fetch
> from _all_ remotes"[1]. Which does save typing over
>
> [...]
>
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2009 at 12:22:35AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> *1* The only thing "git remote update" does that "git fetch" does not
>> is that it can serve as "fetch from everywhere" shorthand.  But that
>> is something we could have added to "git fetch".  So in that sense, I
>> think it may make even more sense to deprecate "remote update" and
>> teach "fetch" how to do that.

...and it would probably help if I had read your footnotes before
responding.

-Peff