Re: [RFC/PATCH] git-branch: default to --track

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jul 8, 2007, 08:59 UTC
Message-ID: <7vhcof2rur.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0707062252390.4093@racer.site>

Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:

> "git branch --track" will setup config variables when branching from 
> a remote branch, so that if you say "git pull" while being on that
> branch, it automatically fetches the correct remote, and merges the
> correct branch.

While I think it would have been the right thing to do if the code did this only for a remote branch, I think there is a bug somewhere. I just saw this:

	... some random changes ...
        master$ git commit -a -s -m 'Some work meant for topic.'
        master$ git branch jc/new-topic
	Branch jc/new-topic set up to track local branch refs/heads/master

Eh?  I did not want this to get applied for my local branches.

The intention of the above command sequence was to do a branch and then "reset --hard HEAD^" to rewind the 'master', as if I did not commit but instead did "checkout -b jc/new-topic && commit && checkout master".

But "checkout -b jc/newtopic" has the same problem, as it eventually uses the same "git-branch" that defaults to --track even for a case where I branch off of a local branch.

I do not necessarily think the command line --track is broken. If the user explicitly says a branch tracks a local branch, so be it. If --track comes from autosetupmerge or built-in default like your patch, however, I do not think it makes much sense to pollute the config file with useless "tracking" information.

I am very tempted to revert this, but won't do so tonight, yet.