Re: [PATCH] "master" should be treated no differently from any other branch

From: Jakub Narebski <jnareb@gmail.com>
Date: Dec 15, 2006, 10:29 UTC
Message-ID: <eltt8n$h4s$1@sea.gmane.org>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0612141710400.3635@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>

Johannes Schindelin wrote:

Show 22 quoted lines

> On Thu, 14 Dec 2006, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote:
> 
>> Wouldn't it be better to mention the id of the local repository too? 
>> 
>>   Merge branch 'master' of ssh+git://git.sv.gnu.org/srv/git/lilypond into 
>>   'master' of 'hanwen@xs4all.nl'
>> 
>> this would give more information when these commit messages get pushed 
>> to someone else.
> 
> And why not put your address and birthday in there, too?
> 
> Frankly, it does not matter. In my private git repository I see that I 
> often merged from this machine to that machine, criss-crossing often. It 
> does not buy me anything to even know _where_ I got it from.
> 
> Besides, the information you are most likely looking for is the committer, 
> which is recorded anyway.
> 
> The single most useful information in the Merge message is the name of the 
> branch I merged, since it is more often than not a topic branch, which is 
> aptly named.

By the way, I run git with merge.summary=true, and it is very nice and usually shows the correct thing... but because git doesn't mark branching points in any way sometimes under feature branch header there are changes not related to given topic, but which were on given branch; the fast-forward case I think.

That said, I'm all for not having "master" branch special-cased, besides having it default name for branch in git-init-db.

-- 
Jakub Narebski
Warsaw, Poland
ShadeHawk on #git