Re: Terminology question about remote branches.

From: Julian Phillips <julian@quantumfyre.co.uk>
Date: Aug 5, 2007, 15:24 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0708051622290.10235@beast.quantumfyre.co.uk>
In-Reply-To: <85ps226mrc.fsf@lola.goethe.zz>

On Sun, 5 Aug 2007, David Kastrup wrote:

Show 19 quoted lines

> Julian Phillips <julian@quantumfyre.co.uk> writes:
>
>> On Sun, 5 Aug 2007, Junio C Hamano wrote:
>>> We would need an official terminology for it.
>>
>> Following was mentioned earlier in this thread ... could we use that?
>>
>> tracking branch:
>>   ref always points at a commit from the remote repo branch
>>
>> following branch:
>>   ref either points at a commit from the remote repo branch, or a
>>   local commit with a commit from the remote repo branch in the history
>>
>> perhaps?
>
> An auto-merging branch?  The term is somewhat more technical so that
> people are less likely to think it just a colloquial alternative
> expression for "tracking".

Personally I don't like auto-merging as it doesn't have any connotations of _what_ is auto-merged ... and it's not really an automatic merge anyway, you have to ask for it (by running pull).

-- 
Julian

  ---
Don't look back, the lemmings are gaining on you.