Re: [PATCH] Documentation/git-clone: describe --mirror more verbose

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Oct 4, 2010, 17:29 UTC
Message-ID: <7vlj6d988o.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
In-Reply-To: <4CA99E43.1000204@drmicha.warpmail.net>

Michael J Gruber <git@drmicha.warpmail.net> writes:

Show 6 quoted lines

>> I choosed to write "overwritten" instead of "updated" to make it clearer
>> that it makes no sence to push into these branches from a different
>> source.  Should this be noted more explicit?
>
> "update" may be more Git lingo but I think either is fine. "overwritten"
> makes it clearer this is not a repo to do development in...

In a repository with remote.origin.mirror set to true, "git fetch origin" does not seem to prune a ref that has been removed from the origin. I think that is a design bug, albeit a minor one ("git fetch -p origin" can fix, but "-p" should not be necessary). A "mirror"'s purpose is to, ehh, mirror a remote so that local people can share it as a nearby copy.

A wording that also implies this automatic deletion of a stale ref would be nice; "overwritten" does not exactly sound like that, though.