From: Santi Béjar <sbejar@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 16:19:53 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] config.txt: update branch.<name>.merge documentation
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:
> 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