Don't mention the author of the PEP

[git-wiki.git] / pep-103.txt

diff --git a/pep-103.txt b/pep-103.txt
index bf8e3898f3f8daf0f259b9bb2c69fed67ba206f4..ab2c351ec6f580145276637032aa0562bfccc079 100644 (file)
--- a/pep-103.txt
+++ b/pep-103.txt
@@ -205,6 +205,16 @@ or update remote-tracking branches without updating local branches.
 Updating local and remote-tracking branches
 -------------------------------------------
 
+To update remote-tracking branches without updating local branches run
+``git remote update [$REMOTE...]``. For example::
+
+    $ git remote update
+    $ git remote update origin
+
+
+Fetch and pull
+''''''''''''''
+
 There is a major difference between
 
 ::
@@ -352,12 +362,6 @@ That changed in git 2.3, but see `the blog post
 for caveats; in 2.4 the push-to-deploy feature was `further improved
 <https://github.com/blog/1994-git-2-4-atomic-pushes-push-to-deploy-and-more#push-to-deploy-improvements>`_.
 
-To update remote-tracking branches without updating local branches run
-``git remote update [$REMOTE...]``. For example::
-
-    $ git remote update
-    $ git remote update origin
-
 
 Tags
 ''''
@@ -588,10 +592,10 @@ that it is very much recommended not to rebase published commits the
 question's diminished even further: "whether to use rebase on
 non-pushed commits?"
 
-That small question is for the team to decide. The author of the PEP
-recommends to use rebase when pulling, i.e. always do ``git pull
---rebase`` or even configure automatic setup of rebase for every new
-branch::
+That small question is for the team to decide. To preserve the beauty
+of linear history it's recommended to use rebase when pulling, i.e. do
+``git pull --rebase`` or even configure automatic setup of rebase for
+every new branch::
 
     $ git config branch.autosetuprebase always