git.vger.kernel.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Rene Herman <rene.herman@keyaccess.nl>
To: Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@gmail.com>
Cc: Brandon Casey <casey@nrlssc.navy.mil>,
	Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>,
	git <git@vger.kernel.org>, Miklos Vajna <vmiklos@frugalware.org>
Subject: Re: "git pull . <branch>" versus "git merge <branch>"
Date: Thu, 12 Jun 2008 02:56:52 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <48507454.2070506@keyaccess.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <237967ef0806111449i7d23976dxa3290eece06b5876@mail.gmail.com>

On 11-06-08 23:49, Mikael Magnusson wrote:

> For me, git-pull is that additional command, and using git-pull . 
> <branch> to merge feels really really strange. Why would I pull
> something I already have?

For what it's worth I (as thread starter) agree with this. At least in 
my mind local and remote branches are very different and I do not mind 
having to "fetch" the latter first before merging (nor combine the two 
through a "pull").

I can see the reason for the other viewpoint as well since it emphasises 
a point about local and remote branches _not_ being very different after 
all but that's more a symmetry to the implementor than it is to a user I 
feel. For the user, local and remote branches just are different.

And as such I feel it actually helps to just use "merge". Thanks for the 
answers everyone -- this was a matter of a user worrying that he wasn't 
getting it...

Rene

  reply	other threads:[~2008-06-12  0:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-06-11  0:51 "git pull . <branch>" versus "git merge <branch>" Rene Herman
2008-06-11  1:06 ` David Symonds
2008-06-11  1:13   ` Rene Herman
2008-06-11  1:56     ` Miklos Vajna
2008-06-11  2:01       ` Rene Herman
2008-06-11  2:04       ` Paolo Bonzini
2008-06-11  2:09         ` Rene Herman
2008-06-11  5:23           ` Paolo Bonzini
2008-06-11 17:56 ` Daniel Barkalow
2008-06-11 18:32   ` Brandon Casey
2008-06-11 19:46     ` Daniel Barkalow
2008-06-11 21:01       ` Brandon Casey
2008-06-11 21:49         ` Mikael Magnusson
2008-06-12  0:56           ` Rene Herman [this message]
2008-06-11 23:01 ` Junio C Hamano
2008-06-12  1:00   ` Rene Herman

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=48507454.2070506@keyaccess.nl \
    --to=rene.herman@keyaccess.nl \
    --cc=barkalow@iabervon.org \
    --cc=casey@nrlssc.navy.mil \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mikachu@gmail.com \
    --cc=vmiklos@frugalware.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).