Re: [PATCH v3 2/4] doc: add an UPSTREAM BRANCHES section to pull/push/fetch
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Sep 24, 2025, 19:51 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqwm5nk4rt.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <3ecfb5c3a67723f160e8161e212d77f95964539c.1758649472.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com>
"Julia Evans via GitGitGadget" <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> writes:
Show 5 quoted lines
> Since the `git pull`, `git push`, and `git fetch` man pages already > include sections on REMOTES and the syntax for URLs, add a section on > UPSTREAM BRANCHES to `urls-remotes.adoc` and rename it to > `urls-remotes-upstreams.adoc`. That's an awkward name but at least it's > clear what's in the file.
You no longer do any such thing ;-) I can locally everyting after "and rename it ..." and replace it with a single full-stop "." so unless there are other things you would need to update this topic with, no need to correct only this part.
Show 9 quoted lines
> In the new UPSTREAM BRANCHES section, cover the various ways that > upstreams branches are automatically set in Git, since users may > mistakenly think that their branch does not have an upstream branch if > they didn't explicitly set one. > > A terminology note: Git uses two terms for this concept: > > - "tracking" as in "the current branch is _tracking_ some remote" > or the `--track` option to `git branch`
Should we say "tracking some branch at a remote"? It is not like the current branch tracks more than one (or all) branches at the remote as a whole.
Show 5 quoted lines
> - "upstream" or "upstream branch", as in `git push --set-upstream`.
> This term is also used in the `git rebase` man page to refer to the
> first argument to `git rebase`, as well as in `git pull` to refer to
> the branch which is going to be merged into the current branch ("merge
> the upstream branch into the current branch")This side is fine.
Show 5 quoted lines
> Use "upstream branch" as a heading for this concept even though the term > "upstream branch" is not always used strictly in the sense of "the > tracking information for the current branch". "Upstream" is used much > more often than "tracking" in the Git docs to refer to this concept and > the goal is to help users understand the docs.
Good.
Show 13 quoted lines
> diff --git a/Documentation/urls-remotes.adoc b/Documentation/urls-remotes.adoc > index 9b10151198..1138a5889d 100644 > --- a/Documentation/urls-remotes.adoc > +++ b/Documentation/urls-remotes.adoc > @@ -91,6 +91,44 @@ git push uses: > HEAD:refs/heads/<head> > ------------ > > - > - > - > +UPSTREAM BRANCHES[[UPSTREAM-BRANCHES]] > +--------------------------------------
Can we have at least two blank lines between these sections to make it visually distinct from a gap between two paragraphs? I know it would not make a difference in the rendered pages, but it would help those who read the document in the source form.
Show 5 quoted lines
> + > +Branches in Git can optionally have an upstream remote branch. > +Git defaults to using the upstream branch for remote operations, for example: > + > +* It's the default for `git pull` or `git fetch` with no arguments
I think you'd want to finish this sentence with a full-stop ".", and a few lines below, the point beginning with "Various commands".
Show 10 quoted lines
> +* It's the default for `git push` with no arguments, with some exceptions. > + For example, you can use the `branch.<name>.pushRemote` option to push > + to a different remote than you pull from, and by default with > + `push.default=simple` the upstream branch you configure must have > + the same name. > +* Various commands, including `git checkout` and `git status`, will > + show you how many commits have been added to your current branch and > + the upstream since you forked from it, for example "Your branch and > + 'origin/main' have diverged, and have 2 and 3 different commits each > + respectively"
Other than these, all changes from the previous version look good to me.
Thanks.