From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-ASN: AS31976 209.132.176.0/21 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MSGID_FROM_MTA_HEADER,RP_MATCHES_RCVD shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 From: Nicolas Pitre Subject: Re: Cleaning up git user-interface warts Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 16:32:58 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: References: <87k61yt1x2.wl%cworth@cworth.org> <455A1137.8030301@shadowen.org> <87hcx1u934.wl%cworth@cworth.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="Boundary_(ID_Ey2lklRRJueR5sPtK9Rrwg)" NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2006 21:33:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: git@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org In-reply-to: X-X-Sender: nico@xanadu.home Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Gk5tv-0003ip-Oh for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 22:33:04 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S966375AbWKNVdA (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Nov 2006 16:33:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S966373AbWKNVdA (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Nov 2006 16:33:00 -0500 Received: from relais.videotron.ca ([24.201.245.36]:19157 "EHLO relais.videotron.ca") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S966375AbWKNVc7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Nov 2006 16:32:59 -0500 Received: from xanadu.home ([74.56.106.175]) by VL-MH-MR001.ip.videotron.ca (Sun Java System Messaging Server 6.2-2.05 (built Apr 28 2005)) with ESMTP id <0J8Q001BNP6Y8GH5@VL-MH-MR001.ip.videotron.ca> for git@vger.kernel.org; Tue, 14 Nov 2006 16:32:58 -0500 (EST) To: Jakub Narebski Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --Boundary_(ID_Ey2lklRRJueR5sPtK9Rrwg) Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 8BIT On Tue, 14 Nov 2006, Jakub Narebski wrote: > Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > > If the fetch+merge behavior (which I think should really be refered as > > pull+merge) is still desirable, then it should be called git-update and > > be no more than a single shell script line such as > > > >         git_pull && git_merge" > > > > This is really what most people expect from such a command name based > > on obvious historical reasons.  The lack of any branch argument to > > git-pull and git-merge could be defined as using the first defined > > remote branch by default.  But having git-pull performing merges is IMHO > > overloading the word and goes against most people's expectations. > > By the way, is anyone doing _remote_ octopus pull (true pull, not with . as > repository)? > > We can always have --merge arguments to git-pull, and --fetch argument to > git-merge. That would be a complete abomination if you want my opinion. Please let git-pull actually pull stuff from a remote place, and git-merge actually merge stuff only. Let's keep simple concepts mapped to simple commands please. Nothing prevents _you_ from scripting more involved operations with a single command of your liking afterwards. Nicolas