The branch descriptions that are set with "git branch --edit-description"
option were used in many places but they weren't clearly documented.

* po/doc-branch-desc:
  doc: show usage of branch description

The branch description will be included in 'git format-patch
--cover-letter' and in 'git pull-request' emails. It can also
be used in the automatic merge message. Tell the reader.

While here, clarify that the description may be a multi-line
explanation of the purpose of the branch's patch series.

Signed-off-by: Philip Oakley <philipoakley@iee.org>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

* mm/branch-doc-updates:
  Documentation/branch: document -M and -D in terms of --force
  Documentation/branch: document -d --force and -m --force

Now that we have proper documentation for --force's interaction with -d
and -m, we can avoid duplication and consider -M and -D as convenience
aliases for -m --force and -d --force.

Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

The --force option was modified in 356e91f (branch: allow -f with -m and
-d, 2014-12-08), but the documentation was not updated.

Signed-off-by: Matthieu Moy <Matthieu.Moy@imag.fr>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

This should improve readability. Compare "thislongname" and
"thisLongName". The following keys are left in unchanged. We can
decide what to do with them later.

 - am.keepcr
 - core.autocrlf .safecrlf .trustctime
 - diff.dirstat .noprefix
 - gitcvs.usecrlfattr
 - gui.blamehistoryctx .trustmtime
 - pull.twohead
 - receive.autogc
 - sendemail.signedoffbycc .smtpsslcertpath .suppresscc

Helped-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy <pclouds@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Eric Sunshine <sunshine@sunshineco.com>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

Make it easier for readers to find the actual config variables that
implement the "upstream" relationship.

Suggested-by: Per Cederqvist <cederp@opera.com>
Signed-off-by: Johan Herland <johan@herland.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

Fix various error messages and conditions in "git branch", e.g. we
advertised "branch -d/-D" to remove one or more branches but actually
implemented removal of zero or more branches---request to remove no
branches was not rejected.

* nd/branch-error-cases:
  branch: let branch filters imply --list
  docs: clarify git-branch --list behavior
  branch: mark more strings for translation
  branch: give a more helpful message on redundant arguments
  branch: reject -D/-d without branch name

Signed-off-by: Thomas Ackermann <th.acker@arcor.de>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>

Currently, a branch filter like `--contains`, `--merged`, or
`--no-merged` is ignored when we are not in listing mode.
For example:

  git branch --contains=foo bar

will create the branch "bar" from the current HEAD, ignoring
the `--contains` argument entirely. This is not very
helpful. There are two reasonable behaviors for git here:

  1. Flag an error; the arguments do not make sense.

  2. Implicitly go into `--list` mode

This patch chooses the latter, as it is more convenient, and
there should not be any ambiguity with attempting to create
a branch; using `--contains` and not wanting to list is
nonsensical.

That leaves the case where an explicit modification option
like `-d` is given.  We already catch the case where
`--list` is given alongside `-d` and flag an error. With
this patch, we will also catch the use of `--contains` and
other filter options alongside `-d`.

Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>