Re: Missing branches after clone

From: Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org>
Date: May 14, 2019, 11:10 UTC
Message-ID: <aeb83b28-3db1-f37c-6cb0-6be5622da114@iee.org>
In-Reply-To: <CACsJy8D9wDiTOfKP4sdMFQrR66qa4cLZuqqn32yH83_q0XjKRg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi Duy,

On 14/05/2019 11:53, Duy Nguyen wrote:

Show 11 quoted lines

> On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 5:33 PM Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org> wrote:
>> Hi Ulrich,
>> On 14/05/2019 11:12, Duy Nguyen wrote:
>>>> Then I foundhttps://stackoverflow.com/questions/10312521/how-to-fetch-all-git-branches  which handles the subject...
>>>> But still the most common solution there still looks like an ugly hack.
>>>> Thus I suggest to improve the man-pages (unless done already)
>>> Yeah I expected to see at least some definition of remote-tracking
>>> branches (vs local ones) but I didn't see one. Room for improvement.
>> Yes, the 'remote tracking branch' name [RTB] is very 'French' in its
>> backwardness (see NATO/OTAN).
> The name is not that bad to me.

It was something that I struggled with initially, and its sounds like Ulrich had a similar issue.

I expect that those who grow up with the development of Git have an organic knowledge that is deeply rooted so the terms will be solidly founded for them (along with many other terms and implementation details that catch me out ;-).

Show 13 quoted lines

>> It is a 'branch which tracks a remote', and it is has the 'last time I
>> looked' state of the branch that is on the remote server, which may
>> have, by now, advanced or changed.
>>
>> So you need to have the three distinct views in your head of 'My branch,
>> held locally', 'my copy of Their branch, from when I last looked', and
>> 'Their branch, on a remote server, in a state I haven't seen recently'.
> What I was looking for is this. I don't think we have something like
> this in the man pages (I only checked a few though) and not even sure
> where it should be if it should be added to the man pages, git-branch?
> git-remote? git-fetch? git-branch.txt might be the best place because
> this is still about branches.
>

At the moment its in `git help glossary`, but could be improved, and references to it given in the various man pages. -- Philip