On Tuesday 20 October 2009 12:23:06 Thomas Rast wrote: > git-pull has historically accepted full fetchspecs, meaning that you > could do > > git pull $repo A:B > > which would simultaneously fetch the remote branch A into the local > branch B and merge B into HEAD. This got especially confusing if B > was checked out. New users variously mistook pull for fetch or read > that command as "merge the remote A into my B", neither of which is > correct. One thought here is that if the change you suggested (and I personally like) in your "[RFC] pull/fetch rename" thread was made, then I would expect to be able to run this exact command to have git fetch the remote branch A into the local branch B (with no merging taking place, because I didn't say -- merge). So basically, it would be like "git fetch $repo A:B" is now. I readily agree that the *current* behavior of that command would have probably caught me off-guard, since I probably only would have typed that on accident (e.g. using "pull" when I meant "fetch"). -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html