Re: confusion over the new branch and merge config

> On Sat, Dec 23, 2006 at 01:51:03AM -0800, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>
>> If you (or other people) use branch.*.merge, with its value set
>> to remote name _and_ local name, and actually verify that either
>> form works without confusion, please report back and I'll apply.
>
> This [using tracking branches in branch.*.merge] seems to be working for
> me, but it is possible to get some confusing results with it. Try this
> config:
>
> [remote "origin"]
>   url = /my/other/git/repo
>   fetch = refs/heads/master:refs/heads/origin
>   fetch = refs/heads/origin:refs/heads/junio
> [branch "master"]
>   remote = origin
>   merge = refs/heads/origin
>
> That is, we have a local tracking branch 'X' which has the same name as
> a remote branch 'X'. When we fetch, both will be marked for merge in
> FETCH_HEAD, and git-pull will attempt to do an octopus.
>
> Is this too convoluted a config to worry about (no, I don't actually do
> this in my repository -- I just constructed the most plausible reason I
> could think of for having conflicting names). I actually think having a
> branch.*.mergelocal would make just as much sense and would be more
> robust (plus, it should be safe and sensible for "git-checkout -b foo
> bar" to point branch.foo.mergelocal to refs/heads/bar).