Re: [PATCH 1/2] fetch: add missing documentation

On Tue, Sep 24, 2013 at 12:36:38AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:

quoted

Yeah, it's not a term we use elsewhere, so it's not great. Probably
"default remote" would be better, or even just say "branch.*.remote for
the current branch" or something.

Yeah, general users don't know what you are talking about when you say that.

Right, I understand your complaint and agree that those terms are
potentially confusing.

quoted

I dunno. I don't particularly like any of those, but I really dislike
the imprecision of "upstream branch" in this case.

For most users it's the remote configured by:

% git branch --set-upstream-to foo
% git checkout -b foo origin/foo
% git checkout -t -b foo bar

So when they read "upstream branch" they know from where it got configured.

Yes, but it is also wrong, in the sense that the upstream branch is
unrelated. You are giving breadcrumbs to users who know "upstream
branch" as a concept and nothing else, but you are misleading users who
know that branch.*.remote exists.

I was hoping you might suggest something that can help both users by
being both precise and giving the appropriate breadcrumbs.

-Peff