From: Julian Phillips Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 15:24:28 GMT Subject: Re: Terminology question about remote branches. Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <85ps226mrc.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> On Sun, 5 Aug 2007, David Kastrup wrote: > Julian Phillips 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.