Do most people feel tracking branches useful?
- From
- Liu Yubao <yubao.liu@gmail.com>
- Date
- Oct 29, 2008, 08:55 UTC
- Message-ID
- <49082514.9050405@gmail.com>
Hi,
I often feel tracking branches are useless to me, because there are remote branches and I work on my private branch in most time.
repos
|
|-- my (private branch, do my dirty work)
|-- master (tracking branch)
|-- origin/master (remote branch)To avoid conflict when execute `git pull` and make the history linear, I work on branch "my" instead of "master". Here is my work flow:
1) use `git fetch` or `git remote update` to synchronize branch "origin/master" with branch "master" in remote repository; 2) create a new private branch to polish my commits and rebase it against "origin/master"; 3) at last push this new branch to the remote repository or ask the upstream developer to fetch it(no `git pull` because we want history as linear as possible).
I don't want to bother with the tracking branch "master", it's identical with "origin/master". Because `git checkout -b xxx <remote_branch>` will create a tracking branch "xxx" by default, so my question is: do most people feel tracking branches useful?
BTW: I feel the terminalogy "remote branch" is confused, because I must synchronize it with `git fetch`. I feel it's better to call it "tracking branch" // seems will lead to bigger confusion to experienced git users:-(