git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com>
To: Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de>
Cc: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>, Johannes Sixt <j6t@kdbg.org>,
	Git Mailing List <git@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] git pull: Remove option handling done by fetch
Date: Sun, 6 Feb 2011 16:09:39 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110206220939.GC17210@elie> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <4D4F19D0.2000408@web.de>

Jens Lehmann wrote:
> Am 06.02.2011 21:45, schrieb Junio C Hamano:
>> Jens Lehmann <Jens.Lehmann@web.de> writes:

>>> Yes, but isn't that exactly what the pull man-page says? Quote:
>>> "Options meant for git pull itself and the underlying git merge
>>> must be given before the options meant for git fetch."
>> 
>> Yes, it says that, and I think that was a weasely way to say "the command
>> line parser in git-pull is broken".
[...]
> (CCed Jonathan, as he is the author of the lines I quoted)

They're from Junio. :)  See v1.5.4.5~26 (git-pull documentation: warn
about the option order, 2008-03-10).

I also agree that (1) it would be very nice to find a way to fix this
and (2) until then, it seems best as a general principle not to
regress in those odd cases where we sort of fixed it.

In other words, if we were adding --recurse-submodules today, I'd
agree that it should be treated like other fetch options, but we
already added the option and some people/scripts might be used to
the added flexibility, no?

  reply	other threads:[~2011-02-06 22:09 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-02-04 20:17 [PATCH] git pull: Remove option handling done by fetch Jens Lehmann
2011-02-04 22:26 ` Johannes Sixt
2011-02-05 11:26   ` Jens Lehmann
2011-02-06 20:45     ` Junio C Hamano
2011-02-06 21:59       ` Jens Lehmann
2011-02-06 22:09         ` Jonathan Nieder [this message]
2011-02-06 22:57           ` Jens Lehmann
2011-02-07  7:41             ` Jonathan Nieder
2011-02-07 19:27               ` [PATCH v2] pull: Document the "--[no-]recurse-submodules" options Jens Lehmann
2011-02-07 21:42                 ` Junio C Hamano
2011-02-07 22:24                   ` [PATCH v3] " Jens Lehmann

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=20110206220939.GC17210@elie \
    --to=jrnieder@gmail.com \
    --cc=Jens.Lehmann@web.de \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=j6t@kdbg.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).