Re: If you would write git from scratch now, what would you change?

[Jan Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1193 bytes --]

On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 14:50:35 -0500, Michael Poole wrote:
> Jan Hudec writes:
> 
> > The basic pull/push actions are:
> >
> > git pull: Bring the remote ref value here.
> > git push: Put the local ref value there.
> >
> > Are those not oposites?
> >
> > Than each command has it's different features on top of this -- pull merges
> > and push can push multiple refs -- but in the basic operation they are
> > oposites.
> 
> I think that is in absolute agreement with David: Ducks swim on the
> surface of the water and lobsters swim underneath.  Why consider the
> different features on top of where they swim?
> 
> The thing about git-pull that surprises so many users is the merge.
> There's a separate command to do that step, and git-pull had a fairly
> good excuse to do the merge before git's 1.5.x remote system was in
> place, but now the only really defensible reason for its behavior is
> history.

When I first looked at hg -- and that was long before I looked at git --
I was surprised that their pull did NOT merge and you had to do a separate
step. Partly because doing those two steps is quite common.

-- 
						 Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb@ucw.cz>

[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]