git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@fieldses.org>
To: Johannes Schindelin <Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>,
	Lars Hjemli <hjemli@gmail.com>,
	Steven Grimm <koreth@midwinter.com>,
	Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
	git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Teach 'git pull' about --rebase
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2007 17:47:17 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20071128224717.GG7376@fieldses.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20071128223339.GF7376@fieldses.org>

On Wed, Nov 28, 2007 at 05:33:39PM -0500, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> What they're really complaining about is the size and complexity of the
> interface, and the lack of a clearly identified subset for them to learn
> first.
> 
> This has so far mainly manifested itself in complaints about the number
> of commands, because that's currently where a lot of our complexity is.
> But they *will* complain about proliferation of commandline switches and
> config options too.  (I've heard complaints about the number of switches
> required on the average cvs commandline, for example.)
> 
> We're stuck expanding the interface here, whether we expand it by
> another command or another commandline switch.
> 
> So, how do you decide whether to make it a new command or not?
> 
> 	- Look at existing documentation that talks about pull: if that
> 	  documentation will still apply to the new pull, that weighs
> 	  for keeping it the same command.  If theat documentation would
> 	  apply only without having a certain config value set, then I
> 	  think it's better as a separate command.
> 
> 	- Will this make it more or less simple to identify the subset
> 	  of the git syntax that a user will have to do a given job?  If
> 	  there are jobs for which someone might only ever need the new
> 	  fetch+rebase, or for which they would only ever need the
> 	  traditional pull, then I think it would keep the two separate,
> 	  to make it easier for a learner to skip over information about
> 	  the one they're not using.
> 
> I've got no proposal for an alternate name.  All that comes to mind is
> the portmanteau "freebase", which is terrible....

Actually, considering the second point: people that are using
fetch+rebase don't necessarily need or (for now) want to understand pull
at all.  But they certainly *do* have to understand rebase.  Would it be
possible to add this to rebase instead of to pull?

	git rebase --url git://x.org/x.git master

where --url means "interpret <upstream> as a branch from the given
remote repository.

That interacts poorly with --onto, though.

--b.

  reply	other threads:[~2007-11-28 22:47 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2007-10-25 22:54 [PATCH] Teach 'git pull' the '--rebase' option Johannes Schindelin
2007-10-25 23:04 ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-25 23:10   ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-10-25 23:36     ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-25 23:49       ` Linus Torvalds
2007-10-25 23:54     ` Junio C Hamano
2007-10-26  9:52       ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-28  0:11         ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-28 13:11           ` [PATCH v2] Teach 'git pull' about --rebase Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-28 13:15             ` Jonathan del Strother
2007-11-28 14:02               ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-28 13:19             ` Jakub Narebski
2007-11-28 20:35             ` Steven Grimm
2007-11-28 20:40               ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-28 21:10                 ` Lars Hjemli
2007-11-28 21:55                   ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-28 21:58                     ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-28 22:06                       ` Steven Grimm
2007-11-28 22:33                       ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-11-28 22:47                         ` J. Bruce Fields [this message]
2007-11-28 23:12                           ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-28 23:32                             ` Junio C Hamano
2007-11-28 23:56                               ` J. Bruce Fields
2007-11-29  0:16                                 ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-11-29  8:36                               ` Andreas Ericsson
2007-11-29  3:23                         ` Nicolas Pitre
2007-11-28 21:59                     ` Jon Loeliger
2007-11-28 22:02                       ` Johannes Schindelin
2007-12-01 20:37                     ` Björn Steinbrink
2007-12-03 13:10                       ` Karl Hasselström
2007-10-26 11:43     ` [PATCH] Teach 'git pull' the '--rebase' option Jeff King
2007-10-26 11:45       ` Jeff King

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=20071128224717.GG7376@fieldses.org \
    --to=bfields@fieldses.org \
    --cc=Johannes.Schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=hjemli@gmail.com \
    --cc=koreth@midwinter.com \
    --cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
    /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).