From: Avery Pennarun <apenwarr@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 27 Aug 2009 22:24:34 GMT
Subject: Re: Question regarding git fetch
Message-ID: <32541b130908271524o163809alc2f6926d110667b3@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20090827221631.GA7058@coredump.intra.peff.net>

On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 10:16 PM, Jeff King<peff@peff.net> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 10:12:50PM +0000, Avery Pennarun wrote:
>> 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?

Yes.

>> 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

Sorry, not my day for accuracy, it seems.  I use both, and I should
have remembered that the triple-dot is the one that worries about the
merge-base.

Have fun,

Avery