From: Stephen Haberman <stephen@exigencecorp.com>
To: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Cc: Andres Perera <andres.p@zoho.com>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pull: Allow pull to preserve merges when rebasing.
Date: Mon, 12 Aug 2013 12:04:50 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20130812120450.47f785b2@sh9> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <7viozbz950.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org>
> How should this interact with 949e0d8e (pull: require choice between
> rebase/merge on non-fast-forward pull, 2013-06-27)
I believe there should not be any conflicts in functionality, other
than just tweaking the docs to mention --rebase=preserve as an option.
Personally, I would assert that, for people using a rebase workflow with
"git pull", --prebase=preserve should be the default behavior, otherwise
they'll be surprised when their feature branches get flattened.
Unfortunately, we can't change the behavior of the naked "--rebase"
flag to really mean "--rebase=preserve", but I think that would be
ideal. I think it's what people mean they do "git pull". If you want a
more raw rebase, they would likely (I think/assume) be running "git
rebase" directly.
Nonetheless, thanks for pointing out 949e0d8e, I did not know about it.
Perhaps after that commit graduates to master, I can base this commit
on it, and tweak the new docs to suggest --rebase=preserve as the
least-surprising behavior.
(Since I'm offering opinions, I think --rebase=preserve would be a great
default for "git pull" in 2.0, but please ignore this statement if
you've already hashed out the future/2.0 behavior of git pull.)
- Stephen
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-08-12 17:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-08-11 21:26 [PATCH] pull: Allow pull to preserve merges when rebasing Stephen Haberman
2013-08-11 23:03 ` Andres Perera
2013-08-11 23:09 ` Stephen Haberman
2013-08-11 23:31 ` Andres Perera
2013-08-11 23:38 ` Stephen Haberman
2013-08-12 5:40 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-08-12 7:00 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-08-12 17:04 ` Stephen Haberman [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-08-13 3:43 Stephen Haberman
2013-08-12 6:21 Stephen Haberman
2013-08-12 6:46 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-08-12 16:28 ` Stephen Haberman
2013-08-10 4:58 Stephen Haberman
2013-08-11 6:16 ` Eric Sunshine
2013-08-11 7:12 ` Eric Sunshine
2013-08-08 17:38 [RFC] allow git pull to preserve merges Stephen Haberman
2013-08-08 17:38 ` [PATCH] pull: Allow pull to preserve merges when rebasing Stephen Haberman
2013-08-08 19:08 ` Stephen Haberman
2013-08-08 21:20 ` Johannes Schindelin
2013-08-08 21:35 ` Stephen Haberman
2013-08-08 21:56 ` Philip Oakley
2013-08-08 21:57 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-08-09 14:19 ` Johannes Schindelin
2013-08-09 15:28 ` Stephen Haberman
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=20130812120450.47f785b2@sh9 \
--to=stephen@exigencecorp.com \
--cc=andres.p@zoho.com \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=gitster@pobox.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).