On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > On Wed, 15 Nov 2006, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > > > > That is an implementation detail that should be easily overcome once the > > notion of tracking branch with URL attribute is implemented. > > Nope. > > I simply don't _have_ those branches. > > Why? Because the kernel is _distributed_. There is no central place > (certainly not my repository) that tracks all the possible branches that > might get merged. > > In other words, I repeat: in a TRULY DISTRIBUTED ENVIRONMENT it makes more > sense to have a "pull" that fetches and merges, over something that > fetches separately and then merges. [...] OK fine. git-pull is there to stay and let's make sure it remains the same. Let's see if, for example, git-merge can be made more useful in the mean time for those evidently inferior people that would prefer an interface that maps more closely to the actual operation that is being performed. And although I do understand what "pull" does, I think I should qualify myself as one of those inferior people nevertheless since /pull . blah" really irritates me. OK I must be really dumb to let myself being disturbed by such an insignificant detail... but apparently I'm not alone. But I promise to never change the "pull" behavior if I ever attempt to fix the "merge" command for the inferior mortals as myself. All power to those with superior minds shall never be removed. ;-) Nicolas - 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