Re: [PATCH] config.txt: update branch.<name>.merge documentation
- From
- Santi Béjar <sbejar@gmail.com>
- Date
- Feb 3, 2007, 16:19 UTC
- Message-ID
- <8aa486160702030819k24a42ac4w115b83980d3ee17e@mail.gmail.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <20070203155652.GL5362@nan92-1-81-57-214-146.fbx.proxad.net>
On 2/3/07, Yann Dirson <ydirson@altern.org> wrote:
Show 17 quoted lines
> On Sat, Feb 03, 2007 at 04:29:40PM +0100, Santi Béjar wrote: > > diff --git a/Documentation/config.txt b/Documentation/config.txt > > index e5e019f..f129de9 100644 > > --- a/Documentation/config.txt > > +++ b/Documentation/config.txt > > @@ -233,11 +233,12 @@ branch.<name>.remote:: > > branch.<name>.merge:: > > When in branch <name>, it tells `git fetch` the default refspec to > > be marked for merging in FETCH_HEAD. The value has exactly to match > > - a remote part of one of the refspecs which are fetched from the remote > > - given by "branch.<name>.remote". > > + the remote or local part of one of the refspecs which are fetched > > + from the remote given by "branch.<name>.remote". > > Since both local and remote refs are allowed, it would be useful to > know how git-fetch decides how to handle them. Looks like the 1st > fetch refspec with that ref on either side is selected.
Yes, the first is selected.
> > git-parser-remote also looks branch.*.merge with --get-all, so it is > interesting to know what happens for multiple values (if git-fetch > just marks them all, how does git-pull react ?).
The last sentence in the branch.<name>.merge says that it would produce an octopus, is this enough?
Santi