Re: [PATCH v8 2/2] status: always show tracking branch even no change

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Aug 26, 2013, 16:08 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqvc2sigdp.fsf@gitster.dls.corp.google.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANYiYbFNGZ=Y4BagNyrZEhO2c6O_J7g-MjA35fqBj2B9aXQf5w@mail.gmail.com>

Jiang Xin <worldhello.net@gmail.com> writes:

Show 14 quoted lines

> 2013/8/26 Jeremy Rosen <jeremy.rosen@openwide.fr>:
>>
>> nitpicking, but shouldn't this be worded as "up to date" rather than "identical" ?
>>
>> The reason is that identical gives the idea that the two branch happen to be on the same
>> commit wheras "up to date" gives the idea that there is a special relationship between
>> these two particular branches. We are not just listing all branches on the same
>> commit as us, we are actively telling you about this branch because it's interesting
>> to you.
>
> That's better. I want to use 'up to date' in the beginning, but I don't know
> which prep. should be used. Now I realize I should:
>
>     s/identical to/up to date with/

Yeah, that, or "in sync with" which may be a bit shorter.

I'll queue with "up-to-date with", as "git grep 'up to date'" tells me that it is less common than "git grep 'up-to-date'", for now.

Thanks.