Hi,

On Thu, 7 Dec 2006, Josef Weidendorfer wrote:

quoted text
> On Thursday 07 December 2006 00:23, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Wed, 6 Dec 2006, Josef Weidendorfer wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wednesday 06 December 2006 13:07, Andy Parkins wrote:
> > > > The [branch "master"] section is such that there is no change to the
> > > > functionality of git-pull, but that functionality is now explicitly
> > > > documented.
> > > 
> > > Nice. However, changing "git-clone" for this is an adhoc solution and 
> > > looks wrong.
> > 
> > Not to me. There is _no_ other place to put this, if you want to help 
> > people graps the concept of branch.*.merge.
> 
> As far as I understand, git-clone defaults to kind of a mirror operation
> while changing remotes ref names slightly as tracking branches, and
> afterwards, it sets up a local branch for development, which is
> branched off from the branch which tracks remote's master.

Yes. And I should back off from my strong language: I think this git-clone 
the most obvious program to set branch.master.merge. It should make life 
easier for new Git users.

Ciao,
Dscho
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html