Sean <seanlkml@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:52:32 -0800 > Carl Worth <cworth@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > The real fix is to stop glossing over git-merge and just give it a > > usable syntax. > > Agreed 100% There's just no good reason to hide the user level > merge command inside of pull. So what about making git-merge take a -m "msg" argument to supply the commit message, in which case it does the current behavior (and thus git-pull needs to change to supply -m); and then make git-merge without any -m parameter invoke "git pull . $@" ? A minor tweak to both apps, a minor breakage to git-merge, but one that I think anyone who invokes it by hand today would find sane (using -m like we do elsewhere) and since the vintage of both git-pull and git-merge should always match shouldn't break anyone who uses git-pull today. -- Shawn. - 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