On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 12:10 -0600, Brian Paul wrote:
> Daniel Stone wrote:
> > 
> > If someone makes sure that no origin commits will get lost, I'll
> > cheerfully nuke the branch and make sure it can't ever be pushed again.

There were no commits to lose, so Daniel removed the bogus origin
branch, thanks.

> I guess I'm confused about "origin" vs. "master".  I've been using 'git 
> pull origin' and 'git push origin' all the time, per the wiki.  Though 
> checking now, the wiki says "git pull" w/out origin.
> 
> What are the ramifications of "nuking the (origin) branch"?  Will 'git 
> push origin' change to something else?

No. The cause of the confusion is probably that 'origin' was
traditionally ambiguous between 'origin, the remote the repository was
cloned from' and 'origin, the local branch corresponding to the master
branch of the origin remote'. The distinction is clearer as of GIT 1.5,
but repositories cloned with an older version need to be converted to
the new style manually.


-- 
Earthling Michel Dänzer           |          http://tungstengraphics.com
Libre software enthusiast         |          Debian, X and DRI developer


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys-and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Mesa3d-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa3d-dev

Reply via email to