git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Pierre Habouzit <madcoder@debian.org>
To: Bill Lear <rael@zopyra.com>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: pull into dirty working tree
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2007 16:38:45 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20070613143845.GD5311@artemis.intersec.eu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <18031.64456.948230.375333@lisa.zopyra.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2697 bytes --]

On Wed, Jun 13, 2007 at 09:14:32AM -0500, Bill Lear wrote:
> We have some CVS users who complain that they cannot do a pull
> into a dirty working tree, as they could under CVS.  Here is
> their scenario: they make a few changes to their code and want
> to test it out; someone else pushes changes to the central repo
> that they then want to add to their working tree to test also;
> they then want to pull in these changes and test everything, as
> if they had done 'mv stuff stuff-; git pull; mv stuff- stuff'.
> 
> They would like an option (perhaps a config option) to do a "dirty
> pull".
> 
> The git-merge documentation states:
> 
>   You may have local modifications in the working tree files. In other
>   words, git-diff is allowed to report changes. However, the merge uses
>   your working tree as the working area, and in order to prevent the
>   merge operation from losing such changes, it makes sure that they do
>   not interfere with the merge. Those complex tables in read-tree
>   documentation define what it means for a path to "interfere with the
>   merge". And if your local modifications interfere with the merge,
>   again, it stops before touching anything.
> 
> But my colleagues are still wondering: why can't git just do it as
> CVS does?
> 
> I know there are workarounds: I myself documented a set of commands
> to "put things on a shelf", but they still are whining.
> 
> I need a convincing argument: not a technical one, but one that is
> practical (e.g. where CVS would do harm that git is preventing).
> 
> So, any explanation that I can give them why we can't have a 'git pull
> --dirty' that moves things out of the way, then does the merge, then
> moves thing back, aside from that it is stupid?

  I suppose the following way would work:

  $ git commit -a -m "temporary commit"  # save current work
  $ git branch -f dirty                  # ..in a separate branch
  $ git reset --hard HEAD~1              # unwind this commit
  $ git pull                             # perform a clean pull
  $ git rebase master dirty              # rewrite the work
  <you may have to fix some conficts here>
  $ git reset master                     # "undo" the commit

  So that's definitely doable.

  Though, in git, if you really work in a "pure" git environment, you
never pull until your work in your topic branch is ready for a merge.
It's a very bad habit to do otherwise: you don't _need_ to pull until
you have a clean slate.

-- 
·O·  Pierre Habouzit
··O                                                madcoder@debian.org
OOO                                                http://www.madism.org

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

  reply	other threads:[~2007-06-13 14:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 43+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-06-13 14:14 pull into dirty working tree Bill Lear
2007-06-13 14:38 ` Pierre Habouzit [this message]
2007-06-13 14:43   ` Pierre Habouzit
2007-06-13 14:47     ` Pierre Habouzit
2007-06-13 14:45   ` Bill Lear
2007-06-13 14:53     ` Pierre Habouzit
2007-06-13 15:01 ` Randal L. Schwartz
2007-06-13 19:28   ` Alex Riesen
2007-06-13 19:32     ` Randal L. Schwartz
2007-06-13 20:47       ` Alex Riesen
2007-06-13 20:52         ` Randal L. Schwartz
2007-06-13 21:39           ` Alex Riesen
2007-06-13 22:01             ` Randal L. Schwartz
2007-06-13 22:27               ` Alex Riesen
2007-06-13 15:01 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-06-13 15:40   ` Andy Parkins
2007-06-13 15:54     ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-06-13 15:56     ` Bill Lear
2007-06-13 16:07       ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-06-13 16:30         ` Bill Lear
2007-06-13 17:13   ` Junio C Hamano
2007-06-14  4:22 ` Daniel Barkalow
2007-06-14  5:21 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-14  7:49   ` Junio C Hamano
2007-06-14  8:01     ` Raimund Bauer
2007-06-14  8:06     ` Steven Grimm
2007-06-14 14:25       ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-06-14 12:46   ` Bill Lear
2007-06-14 15:46     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-14 20:20       ` Olivier Galibert
2007-06-14 20:30         ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-15  0:46       ` Martin Langhoff
2007-06-15  1:07         ` Linus Torvalds
2007-06-15  3:33           ` Martin Langhoff
2007-06-15 18:26             ` Robin Rosenberg
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-06-13 15:03 MichaelTiloDressel
2007-06-13 15:36 ` Bill Lear
2007-06-13 17:31   ` Michael Dressel
2007-06-13 18:12     ` Bill Lear
2007-06-13 18:30       ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-06-13 18:56         ` Bill Lear
2007-06-13 20:17           ` Robin Rosenberg
2007-06-13 23:32             ` Johannes Schindelin

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20070613143845.GD5311@artemis.intersec.eu \
    --to=madcoder@debian.org \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=rael@zopyra.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).