Re: [PATCH] Only warn about missing branch.<n>.merge in pull.
- From
Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
- Date
- Dec 19, 2006, 10:30 UTC
- Message-ID
- <Pine.LNX.4.63.0612191128500.19693@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <200612190159.58658.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de>
Hi,
On Tue, 19 Dec 2006, Josef Weidendorfer wrote:
Show 11 quoted lines
> On Monday 18 December 2006 21:43, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > However, I would actually reuse our versatile (often hated?) config > > handling: > > > > [branch "xyz"] > > remote = blabla # this is the default remote > > merge = master # this is the default branch for the default remote > > merge = pu for remote second # merge 'pu' if pulling from second > > Looks a little bit confusing, but is fine with me.
Granted. Suggestions?
> I even would remove the need for the word "remote" in the second merge > line.
No. In Git, a line like
blabla
would turn into a boolean named "blabla" being true.
Ciao, Dscho