Re: best way to fastforward all tracking branches after a fetch
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Dec 12, 2011, 08:28 UTC
- Message-ID
- <7vhb165h0d.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
- In-Reply-To
- <hbf.20111211x512@bombur.uio.no>
Hallvard B Furuseth <h.b.furuseth@usit.uio.no> writes:
> Local branches can track each other. So the script needs to toposort > the branches, or to loop until either nothing was done or an error > happened. (The latter to prevent an eternal loop on error.)
If you have branches A that forked from B that in turn forked from C, and if after updating C you want to and can successfully update both B and A by fast-forwarding, that would only mean that neither A nor B had their own change since they were forked from their upstream, regardless of local or remote.
What use do these empty branches have in the first place?