Re: What's in git.git (stable)

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Dec 22, 2006, 20:44 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0612222141060.19693@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
In-Reply-To: <7virg3zo1k.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>

Hi,

On Fri, 22 Dec 2006, Junio C Hamano wrote:

Show 17 quoted lines

> Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de> writes:
> 
> > HOWEVER, it has been in "What's cooking in git (topics)".
> >
> > Having said that, we could (at least for some time) print a big red 
> > warning for the specific case of "git pull" meaning "git pull origin 
> > <whateveristhefirstfetchedhead>" that this will GO AWAY SOON.
> >
> > Of course, you would not see it. Only your script.
> >
> > BTW I would _never_ allow a script to rely on such a DWIM feature.
> 
> That's too strong a statement.  It is not DWIM but has been a
> longstanding rule to use "the first set of branches" for the
> merge.  We've merged the first set of branches since day one,
> and even after branch.*.merge we've done so unless you do not
> have such configuration.

Okay, I have been wrong. My sincere apologies.

So, if I understand your option (2) correctly, it complains _only_ if there is at least one branch.*.merge in the config, but not for the current branch?

I think that would safeguard the existing repositories _and_ the new ones, because git-clone sets them up with such an entry to begin with.

If that behaviour was meant by (2), I am all for it.

Ciao, Dscho