From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:06:07 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] git-fetch: Allow branch."branchname".remote=.
Message-ID: <ego2vm$568$1@sea.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0610131448390.14200@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>

<opublikowany i wysłany>

Johannes Schindelin wrote:


> On Fri, 13 Oct 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote:
> 
>> Johannes Schindelin wrote:
>> 
>> > There is a subtle problem here. Up until now, "remote" meant a short cut. 
>> > You either had a file with that name in .git/remotes/ or .git/branches, or 
>> > an entry in the config (remote.<name>.url).
>> 
>> Not exactly. "git-pull . <branch>" and "git-peek-remote ." meant use
>> _current_ repository. "." as remote name means "current", i.e. local 
>> repository.
> 
> From Documentation/git-pull.txt:
> 
>       SYNOPSIS
>       --------
>       'git-pull' <options> <repository> <refspec>...
> 
> It says "repository", not "remote". As for the name "git-peek-remote": 
> yes, it is a short cut for "remote repository".
> 
> The thing is, if you say you pull "from a remote", then it is not 
> sufficient to specify just a URL of a repository. You also have to specify 
> a branch.

O.K. "remote" = "repository + set of branches". But we can say that "."
is a default remote, which points to local repository (".") and has
no branches information.
-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git