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. -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git - 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