From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Ericsson Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCH] fail pull/merge early in the middle of conflicted merge Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2007 16:37:56 +0100 Message-ID: <459D1F54.1060709@op5.se> References: <7vwt478b5d.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <20070101204354.GA26687@spearce.org> <7vmz51usqf.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: "Shawn O. Pearce" , git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Jan 04 16:38:05 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1H2UfJ-0000QP-Ji for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Thu, 04 Jan 2007 16:38:01 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S964925AbXADPh6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jan 2007 10:37:58 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S964927AbXADPh6 (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jan 2007 10:37:58 -0500 Received: from linux-server1.op5.se ([193.201.96.2]:54875 "EHLO smtp-gw1.op5.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S964925AbXADPh5 (ORCPT ); Thu, 4 Jan 2007 10:37:57 -0500 Received: from [192.168.1.20] (unknown [213.88.215.14]) by smtp-gw1.op5.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63BCE6BCC2; Thu, 4 Jan 2007 16:37:56 +0100 (CET) User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.7 (X11/20060913) To: Junio C Hamano In-Reply-To: <7vmz51usqf.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Shawn O. Pearce" writes: > >> Junio C Hamano wrote: >>> After a pull that results in a conflicted merge, a new user >>> often tries another "git pull" in desperation. When the index >>> is unmerged, merge backends correctly bail out without touching >>> either index nor the working tree, so this does not make the >>> wound any worse. >> I've seen this many times too. I don't understand why users cannot >> read output messages and realize the current command failed, but >> they don't. *sigh* > > That is not user's fault. Tools should not make things worse > when run more than once after they failed, and we do not either, > so it is not a stupid behaviour on the user's part to do that. > > We just need to make sure that it is more clear to the user that > pull after a conflicted pull is futile, which is what this patch > does. > "Pulling is futile. Nothing will be assimilated" ? -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231