Re: [PATCH] Documentation: update git-pull.txt for clone's new default behavior

--- Junio C Hamano <junkio@cox.net> wrote:

Luben Tuikov [off-list ref] writes:

quoted

Questions:

What is the reasonining of defining branch.<name>.merge to point
to the "remote's setup"?

See list archives.  

Because you are not required to use remote tracking branches.

Then why does it point to the _remote_ mapping?  One shouldn't
care what it is, and how it looks in the remote repo.  That is
handled by [remote].  In [branch] I shouldn't have to have any
absolute references, i.e. branch.<name>.remote points to [remote],
and branch.<name>.merge should only give a _branch_ name,
whose remote-to-local mapping (which preserves the branch name)
can be found by dereferencing branch.<name>.remote to get to
remote.<rname>.fetch.

Think of it as DB schema normalization.

     Luben

By the way, I think we allow the name of the remote tracking
branch as well, but we do not advertise it -- always using
remote's name consistently is much less confusing.

quoted

The reasoning is that the remote's setup should only leak into
[remote] and no further.  I.e. [remote] is the only one concerned
with the mapping between the remote repo and the local repo.

No.  Remote is not about mapping -- if mapping is there you can
talk about it, but that is optional.