Marc Branchaud <> writes:

>> +When the remote branch you want to fetch is known to
>> +be rewound and rebased regularly, it is expected that
>> +the tip of it will not be descendant of the commit that
>> +used to be at its tip the last time you fetched it and
>> +stored in your remote-tracking branch.  You would want
> I think the second part of that last sentence might be clearer as
>       it is expected that its new tip will not be a descendant of
>       its previous tip (as stored in your remote-tracking branch
>       the last time you fetched).

Yeah, that reads better.  Thanks.

> Then start the next sentence with
>       In this case, you would want ....

I somehow find that "in this case" redundant, given that "for such
branches" already limits the scope of the suggestion.  I dunno.

>> +to use the `+` sign to indicate non-fast-forward updates
>> +will be needed for such branches.  There is no way to
>> +determine or declare that a branch will be made available
>> +in a repository with this behavior; the pulling user simply
>>  must know this is the expected usage pattern for a branch.
>>  +
>>  [NOTE]
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at

Reply via email to