From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bill Lear Subject: Re: Git rescue mission Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 16:33:12 -0600 Message-ID: <17867.42280.577214.422651@lisa.zopyra.com> References: <17866.27739.701406.722074@lisa.zopyra.com> <17867.40122.51865.575762@lisa.zopyra.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, Jakub Narebski To: Linus Torvalds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Feb 08 23:33:30 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HFHpY-0006k4-0x for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 08 Feb 2007 23:33:28 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1423495AbXBHWdY (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Feb 2007 17:33:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1423497AbXBHWdY (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Feb 2007 17:33:24 -0500 Received: from mail.zopyra.com ([65.68.225.25]:61726 "EHLO zopyra.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1423495AbXBHWdY (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Feb 2007 17:33:24 -0500 Received: (from rael@localhost) by zopyra.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id l18MXFl30025; Thu, 8 Feb 2007 16:33:15 -0600 In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 7.18 under Emacs 21.1.1 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Thursday, February 8, 2007 at 14:13:47 (-0800) Linus Torvalds writes: >On Thu, 8 Feb 2007, Bill Lear wrote: >> >> However, I still have a few open issues with the other branch of this >> discussion, i.e., why can we not have an update operation that >> respects branches in the first place, as 'git pull' seems to do, when >> run from the master branch? > >Actually, git does that all correctly for other branches too, but only in >git-1.5. > >... >So it might be worth while trying out git-1.5.0-rc4, and seeing if that >solves some of the UI issues for you guys. It changes things like where >the default remote branches are, and makes the distinction between "my >local copy of branch X" and "the remote branch X" much clearer, which has >clearly been a UI problem. Ok, very reasonable. I've been our corporate guinea pig, so I'll give this a whirl. One thing I'm very, very happy about in git is the ability to quickly experiment. Believe it or not, I have solved actual git problems in our company by doing just that. Of necessity, it's largely my complaints and problems that are aired here, though. Bill