list mirror (unofficial, one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Junio C Hamano <>
To: "Philip Oakley" <>
Cc: "Jens Hausherr" <>, <>
Subject: Re: Deletion of remote branches
Date: Mon, 01 Oct 2012 13:42:38 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <583784AD1BE54FD582B1D58FE7F4CADA@PhilipOakley> (Philip Oakley's message of "Mon, 1 Oct 2012 21:12:10 +0100")

"Philip Oakley" <> writes:

>> All of the above are expected and working as designed.  Remote
>> tracking branches are local _copies_ of what you have over there at
>> the remote repository. The latter is the authoritative version, and
>> you asked "ls-remote" to go over the network to view them.
> Is there a definitive naming convention for the two types of 'remote 
> branch'?
> IIRC (somewhere) the 'tracking' term was to be deprecated, though it is 
> still in common use. It is usually only the context that clarifies if it 
> is the local or the distant copy/repo.

That is somewhat different from what I recall:

 - "refs/remotes/$there/$that" is a copy of $that branch at the
   remote $there; we call that a "remote tracking branch".

   When people say "remote branch", they often mean $that branch at
   the remote $there, not your local copy of it.

   When you say "remote tracking branch", you are talking about
   something you locally have to track the corresponding "remote
   branch".  This use is not deprecated at all.  That is the only
   sane way to clarify which one of the two you are talking about.

 - If your branch "foo" always integrates with branch "bar" at the
   remote "xyzzy", you would often run

	git pull xyzzy bar
        git pull --rebase xyzzy bar

   after running "git chekcout foo".  You may even have this in your
   per-repository configuration:

	[branch "foo"]
		remote = xyzzy
                merge = refs/heads/bar

   In such a situation, some people (used to) say that "foo tracks
   bar from xyzzy".  While such a colloquial use is perfectly fine
   when it is clear that "foo" being discussed is your local branch,
   the verb "track" in that sentence is used to mean an entirely
   different kind of relationship between your "remotes/xyzzy/bar"
   and the branch "bar" at remote "xyzzy", where the former is the
   "remote tracking branch" for the latter, leading to confusion.
   This use of 'track' is what is discouraged these days.

I think we call the latter @{upstream} of "foo" these days.

  reply	other threads:[~2012-10-01 21:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 5+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-10-01 13:22 Jens Hausherr
2012-10-01 17:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2012-10-01 20:12   ` Philip Oakley
2012-10-01 20:42     ` Junio C Hamano [this message]
2012-10-02  6:57       ` Jens Hausherr

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

  List information:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this inbox:

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).