Hi,

On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Andreas Ericsson wrote:

quoted text
> Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Andreas Ericsson wrote:
> > 
> > > Conceptually, I don't think it'll be any problem what so ever 
> > > telling anyone that the branches that aren't currently checked out 
> > > get merged automatically only if they result in a fast-forward.
> > 
> > It would be a matter of seconds until someone asks "why only 
> > fast-forwards? Would it not be _much_ better to merge _always_?  
> > Stupid git."
> > 
> > And all because the concept of "local" vs "remote" was blurred.
> 
> It's already blurred, since we have git-pull instead of just git-fetch.

Huh?  How is "I ask git pull to fetch the remote branch, and merge it into 
my local branch" a blurring of local vs remote branch?

The local branch is still the local branch where it is _my_ responsibility 
to update or change anything.  The remote branch is not.  If at all, I can 
push -- iff it fast-forwards.

The fact that you can set up local mirroring branches (with "git remote 
add") which are only updated via "git fetch" is _no_ blurring of the 
concepts: we make it quite explicit that you cannot check them out.  They 
are not local branches.

Hth,
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