From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: git pull opinion Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2007 01:16:30 +0000 (GMT) Message-ID: References: <3abd05a90711051352t2f6be00bsa862585abd370fb1@mail.gmail.com> <7vd4uomfn8.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> <18223.46848.109961.552827@lisa.zopyra.com> <472FBB3F.8080307@op5.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Bill Lear , Junio C Hamano , Aghiles , git@vger.kernel.org To: Andreas Ericsson X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue Nov 06 02:17:38 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 1IpD4U-0007Mc-2x for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Tue, 06 Nov 2007 02:17:38 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755474AbXKFBRY (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Nov 2007 20:17:24 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753951AbXKFBRX (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Nov 2007 20:17:23 -0500 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:36271 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1755469AbXKFBRX (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 Nov 2007 20:17:23 -0500 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 06 Nov 2007 01:17:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (EHLO openvpn-client) [138.251.11.103] by mail.gmx.net (mp035) with SMTP; 06 Nov 2007 02:17:21 +0100 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1/a08AYtJXam/eUBzTZ5hzHiyMF8cfH3oWP1IGo/v h726SqexTvTBQ1 X-X-Sender: gene099@racer.site In-Reply-To: <472FBB3F.8080307@op5.se> X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Tue, 6 Nov 2007, Andreas Ericsson wrote: > Bill Lear wrote: > > On Monday, November 5, 2007 at 15:33:31 (-0800) Junio C Hamano writes: > > > Aghiles writes: > > > > > > > Is there an "easier" way to pull into a dirty directory ? I am > > > > asking this to make sure I understand the problem and not > > > > because I find it annoying to type those 4 commands to perform > > > > a pull (although some of my colleagues do find that annoying :). > > > You need to switch your mindset from centralized SVN workflow. > > > > > > The beauty of distributedness is that it redefines the meaning > > > of "to commit". In distributed systems, the act of committing > > > is purely checkpointing and it is not associated with publishing > > > the result to others as centralized systems force you to. > > > > > > Stop thinking like "I need to integrate the changes from > > > upstream into my WIP to keep up to date." You first finish what > > > you are currently doing, at least to the point that it is > > > stable, make a commit to mark that state, and then start > > > thinking about what other people did. You may most likely do a > > > "git fetch" followed by "git rebase" to update your WIP on top > > > of the updated work by others. > > > > > > Once you get used to that, you would not have "a dirty > > > directory" problem. > > > > I respectfully beg to differ. I think it is entirely reasonable, and > > not a sign of "centralized" mindset, to want to pull changes others > > have made into your dirty repository with a single command. > > > > I find it much more convenient to just fetch them. I'd rather see > git-pull being given a --rebase option (which would ultimately mean > teaching git-merge about it) to rebase already committed changes on > top of the newly fetched tracking branch. It's being worked on, but > rather slowly. git-pull learning about --rebase does not mean teaching git-merge about it. See my patch, which you (and others) failed to enthusiastically embrace, which is the sole reason it is stalled. Ciao, Dscho