From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: git pull for update of netdev fails. Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 21:58:48 +0200 Organization: At home Message-ID: References: <20060920080308.673a1e93@localhost.localdomain> <20060920155431.GO8259@pasky.or.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Sep 20 22:00:22 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GQ8Er-0003WM-Rg for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2006 22:00:10 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932360AbWITUAF (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:00:05 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932359AbWITUAF (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:00:05 -0400 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:52966 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932353AbWITUAD (ORCPT ); Wed, 20 Sep 2006 16:00:03 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1GQ8EA-0003KY-Nf for git@vger.kernel.org; Wed, 20 Sep 2006 21:59:31 +0200 Received: from host-81-190-26-109.torun.mm.pl ([81.190.26.109]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2006 21:59:26 +0200 Received: from jnareb by host-81-190-26-109.torun.mm.pl with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 20 Sep 2006 21:59:26 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: git@vger.kernel.org X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: host-81-190-26-109.torun.mm.pl Mail-Copies-To: jnareb@gmail.com User-Agent: KNode/0.10.2 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Petr Baudis wrote: > Dear diary, on Wed, Sep 20, 2006 at 05:28:08PM CEST, I got a letter > where Linus Torvalds said that... >> However, you can tell git that Jeff is being difficult by marking such >> branches individually as being rebased. > > This is really a wrong way of describing the problem - I'd say that Git > is being difficult here. The point is, the subsystem maintainers need to > maintain stacks of patches and rebase against the main kernel branch > regularily, and they want to still publish their current state. So it's > not really any of them being strange or difficult, but Git being so > because it has no seamless support for tracking those branches. There was idea around moving remotes configuration to config file to have some per branch configureation, including readonly for protecting tracking branches, marking default branch for merge with (and which tracking branch(es) to merge)... ...and that included marking branch _on the server side_ as being rebased, i.e. without preserved history. Unfortunately, the discussion petered out without changes to git. Branch marked as pu-like would either get '+' in appropriate Pull line in remotes file generated during clone, or they wouldn't need '+'. By the way, there is '--force' option to git-pull/git-fetch... -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git