git-pull.txt: correct outdated example + link to specific 'git fetch' section

I was reading the git pull documentation and discovered an outdated example description. While reading the git fetch documentation to confirm the behaviour described ingit pull was indeed wrong, I figured it would be easier to refer directly to the "Configured remote-tracking branches" section in git fetch from the git pull documentation, just as in git fetch.

Philippe Blain (2):
pull doc: refer to a specific section in 'fetch' doc pull doc: correct outdated description of an example

 Documentation/git-pull.txt         | 6 +++---
 Documentation/pull-fetch-param.txt | 3 ++-
 2 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

base-commit: 9fadedd637b312089337d73c3ed8447e9f0aa775
Published-As: https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git/releases/tag/pr-git-751%2Fphil-blain%2Fdoc-pull-update-remote-tracking-v1
Fetch-It-Via: git fetch https://github.com/gitgitgadget/git pr-git-751/phil-blain/doc-pull-update-remote-tracking-v1
Pull-Request: https://github.com/git/git/pull/751

gitgitgadget

From: Philippe Blain <[email protected]>

The documentation for the <refspec> parameter in the git fetch documentation refers to the section "CONFIGURED REMOTE-TRACKING BRANCHES" in this same documentation page.

In the git pull documentation, let's also refer specifically to this section instead of just linking to the git fetch documentation.

---
 Documentation/pull-fetch-param.txt | 3 ++-
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

index 7d3a60f5b93..95ea8499029 100644
@@ -19,7 +19,8 @@ ifndef::git-pull[]
 	(see <<CRTB,CONFIGURED REMOTE-TRACKING BRANCHES>> below).
 endif::git-pull[]
 ifdef::git-pull[]
-	(see linkgit:git-fetch[1]).
+	(see the section "CONFIGURED REMOTE-TRACKING BRANCHES"
+	in linkgit:git-fetch[1]).
 endif::git-pull[]
 +
 The format of a <refspec> parameter is an optional plus

gitgitgadget

From: Philippe Blain <[email protected]>

Since f269048754 (fetch: opportunistically update tracking refs, 2013-05-11), the underlying git fetch in git pull <remote> <branch> updates the configured remote-tracking branch for <branch>.

However, an example in the 'Examples' section of the git pull documentation still states that this is not the case.

Correct the description of this example.

---
 Documentation/git-pull.txt | 6 +++---
 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

index dfb901f8b83..21e10905fa2 100644
@@ -229,9 +229,9 @@ branch.<name>.merge options; see linkgit:git-config[1] for details.
 $ git pull origin next
 ------------------------------------------------
 +
-This leaves a copy of `next` temporarily in FETCH_HEAD, but
-does not update any remote-tracking branches. Using remote-tracking
-branches, the same can be done by invoking fetch and merge:
+This leaves a copy of `next` temporarily in FETCH_HEAD, and
+updates the remote-tracking branch `origin/next`.
+The same can be done by invoking fetch and merge:
 +
 ------------------------------------------------
 $ git fetch origin

gitgitgadget

Makes sense. One thought:

Yeah, I think the example just never got updated. Your patch looks good.

Another option would be to use a direct URL rather than a configured remote, which really would just update FETCH_HEAD. But I don't think the handling of remote-tracking branches is central to this example either way, so your minimal change is better.

-Peff

Hi Peff,

I didn't know it was possible. I agree that cross-linking directly to a specific section would be great, especially if it would work for the manpages, the HTML documentation as well as the website!

Philippe.