From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.180.0/23 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.0 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 08BA21F461 for ; Tue, 14 May 2019 11:49:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726248AbfENLtr convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 May 2019 07:49:47 -0400 Received: from mx4.uni-regensburg.de ([194.94.157.149]:55038 "EHLO mx4.uni-regensburg.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1725893AbfENLtr (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 May 2019 07:49:47 -0400 Received: from mx4.uni-regensburg.de (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost (Postfix) with SMTP id 86CFD6000055 for ; Tue, 14 May 2019 13:49:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de (gwsmtp1.uni-regensburg.de [132.199.5.51]) by mx4.uni-regensburg.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B22B6000051 for ; Tue, 14 May 2019 13:49:44 +0200 (CEST) Received: from uni-regensburg-smtp1-MTA by gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de with Novell_GroupWise; Tue, 14 May 2019 13:49:44 +0200 Message-Id: <5CDAAB56020000A100031334@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise Internet Agent 18.1.1 Date: Tue, 14 May 2019 13:49:42 +0200 From: "Ulrich Windl" To: Subject: Antw: Re: Missing branches after clone References: <5CDA8D37020000A100031319@gwsmtp.uni-regensburg.de> <0c9ec78a-9245-e1df-7ec6-a5d77d1a5261@iee.org> In-Reply-To: <0c9ec78a-9245-e1df-7ec6-a5d77d1a5261@iee.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Hi! The confusing part actually is for me: "git clone" does NOT "Clone a repository into a new directory", but "clone the current branch into a new directory" (IMHO). So I was surprised that I couldn't merge branches under the same name in the cloned "repository". Only "git clone --bare" actually seems to clone "the repository". I think this is very confusing to new users. At least I didn't quite get the reasoning for that. Regards, Ulrich >>> Philip Oakley schrieb am 14.05.2019 um 12:33 in Nachricht <0c9ec78a-9245-e1df-7ec6-a5d77d1a5261@iee.org>: > Hi Ulrich, > On 14/05/2019 11:12, Duy Nguyen wrote: >>> Then I > foundhttps://stackoverflow.com/questions/10312521/how-to-fetch-all-git-branch > es which handles the subject... >>> But still the most common solution there still looks like an ugly hack. >>> Thus I suggest to improve the man-pages (unless done already) >> Yeah I expected to see at least some definition of remote-tracking >> branches (vs local ones) but I didn't see one. Room for improvement. > Yes, the 'remote tracking branch' name [RTB] is very 'French' in its > backwardness (see NATO/OTAN). > > It is a 'branch which tracks a remote', and it is has the 'last time I > looked' state of the branch that is on the remote server, which may > have, by now, advanced or changed. > > So you need to have the three distinct views in your head of 'My branch, > held locally', 'my copy of Their branch, from when I last looked', and > 'Their branch, on a remote server, in a state I haven't seen recently'. > > Finding a better name for the "RTB", one with an easier cognitive load > for those trying to understand Git, would be an improvement. > > Though there has been a similar issue with 'staging the index'. > Ultimately it is a new way of thinking about artefacts (perfect > duplicates, no originals, no master, no copies, just verification > hashes) so needs new terms and a difficult learning experience. > -- > Philip