Re: confusion over the new branch and merge config

> Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> writes:
> 
> > Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:
> >
> >> BTW, is there some explanation why branch.*.merge specifies a _remote_
> >> head? The following would make much more sense to me:
> >>
> >> [branch "master"]
> >> remote = origin
> >> merge = refs/remotes/origin/master
> >
> > Only *if* you store it in that tracking branch.  The name the
> > other party gives _do_ matter to you anyway, because you have to
> > _know_ it to fetch.  What it does NOT matter is if you use a
> > tracking branch, or if you do, which local tracking branch you
> > use to track it.
> 
> Having said that, I think we _could_ do this.
> 
> 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.