From: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Date: Tue, 24 Sep 2013 05:30:23 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] fetch: add missing documentation
Message-ID: <20130924053023.GA5875@sigill.intra.peff.net>
In-Reply-To: <CAMP44s1FFTS=wOcWBfqg3zt3TO-aM83oXHcGwBcwvt_HnXrn8g@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:23:21AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:

> > Should this be "upstream remote" rather than "upstream branch"? I don't
> > think we should be looking at branch.*.merge at all for git-fetch.
> 
> As a general user, how do I configure the "upstream remote"?

Yeah, it's not a term we use elsewhere, so it's not great. Probably
"default remote" would be better, or even just say "branch.*.remote for
the current branch" or something.

I dunno. I don't particularly like any of those, but I really dislike
the imprecision of "upstream branch" in this case.

-Peff