From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andreas Ericsson Subject: Re: best git practices, was Re: Git User's Survey 2007 unfinished summary continued Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:24:03 +0200 Message-ID: <47206EC3.5000002@op5.se> References: <8fe92b430710221635x752c561ejcee14e2526010cc9@mail.gmail.com> <92320AA3-6D23-4967-818D-F7FA3962E88D@zib.de> <90325C2E-9AF4-40FB-9EFB-70B6D0174409@zib.de> <20071024192058.GF29830@fieldses.org> <471F9FD1.6080002@op5.se> <20071024194849.GH29830@fieldses.org> <86784BB7-076F-4504-BCE6-4580A7C68AAC@zib.de> <20071024203335.GJ29830@fieldses.org> <471FB3D0.4040800@op5.se> <20071024212854.GB6069@xp.machine.xx> <471FBF29.8030802@op5.se> <47204ECA.7040309@op5.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Peter Baumann , "J. Bruce Fields" , Steffen Prohaska , Jakub Narebski , Federico Mena Quintero , git@vger.kernel.org To: Johannes Schindelin X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Thu Oct 25 12:24:29 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Ikzt5-0006fW-2G for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:24:27 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755985AbXJYKYM (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 06:24:12 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755960AbXJYKYK (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 06:24:10 -0400 Received: from mail.op5.se ([193.201.96.20]:55462 "EHLO mail.op5.se" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755875AbXJYKYI (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Oct 2007 06:24:08 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by mail.op5.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FFFB1730709; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:24:06 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.499 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.499 tagged_above=-10 required=6.6 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RDNS_NONE=0.1] Received: from mail.op5.se ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail.op5.se [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0kWraNZChRY2; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:24:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: from nox.op5.se (unknown [192.168.1.20]) by mail.op5.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7166A17306ED; Thu, 25 Oct 2007 12:24:04 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.5 (X11/20070727) In-Reply-To: Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Johannes Schindelin wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, 25 Oct 2007, Andreas Ericsson wrote: > >> Johannes Schindelin wrote: >> >>> On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Andreas Ericsson wrote: >>> >>>> Conceptually, I don't think it'll be any problem what so ever >>>> telling anyone that the branches that aren't currently checked out >>>> get merged automatically only if they result in a fast-forward. >>> It would be a matter of seconds until someone asks "why only >>> fast-forwards? Would it not be _much_ better to merge _always_? >>> Stupid git." >>> >>> And all because the concept of "local" vs "remote" was blurred. >> It's already blurred, since we have git-pull instead of just git-fetch. > > Huh? How is "I ask git pull to fetch the remote branch, and merge it into > my local branch" a blurring of local vs remote branch? > > The local branch is still the local branch where it is _my_ responsibility > to update or change anything. True. So git pull saves you exactly one command. The various fetch-all-git- repos-and-update-all-fast-forward-branches in circulation at the office save us ~500 commands each time they're run. Or rather, they *could* do that, but you can't know until you've run it. So what should I do to make what I want possible, without having git-pull muddy the waters of local vs remote? There's clearly a user desire for it, besides that of my eight co-workers and myself. Introduce git-? -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231