On Tue, Feb 10, 2009 at 5:05 PM, Marc Branchaud <marcnarc@xiplink.com> wrote:
quoted text
> I'm happy to use more accurate phrasing -- I was just going for a minimal change.
>
> How about the following, consistent for both cases:
>
> 'git pull' merges branch master with remote branch
>  master
> 'git pull' rebases branch rebaser on top of remote branch
>  side
>
> ?
>
> I like the above because the keywords & branch names are in consistent locations, making it easier to parse the output.

The output of git remote show seems much too verbose for the
information it provides. Something like this, I think, provides the
same information in much less space:

* remote origin
  URL: git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/git/git.git
  Remote branches:
    html      Not tracked
    maint     Tracked
    man       Tracked
    master    Tracked
    next      Tracked
    pu        Tracked
    todo      Not tracked
    old-next  Stale (would prune)
  Local branches configured to pull from this remote:
    master           upstream is master (merges)
    wip/remote-HEAD  upstream is next   (rebases)

When run with "-n" the status column would be blank or say "Status not
available with -n".

$0.02. :-)

j.
--
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