On Sun, Sep 08, 2013 at 12:09:34AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > It's not if you understand the difference between merge-then-commit and > > commit-then-merge. But for a clueless user who has been told "replace > > svn commit" with "git commit && git push" and replace "svn update" with > > "git pull", it is quite similar. > > Well, yeah, but if they are so clueless they have to be told what to > do, they can be told to do 'git pull --merge' instead, no? I think it's fine to tell them to do "git pull --merge". What I'd worry more about is somebody who is suddenly presented with the choice between "--rebase" and "--merge" and doesn't know which to choose. We've created a cognitive load on the user, and even more load if they choose --rebase and don't quite understand what it means. The current warning message in jc/pull-training-wheel is quite neutral between the two options. Perhaps we should lean more towards merging? I guess that works against John's case, though, which is clueless people working on a project that _does_ care about the shape of history. At least they would have to stop and think for a moment, though, which might help (and maybe convince them to ask more clueful project members). I don't know. -Peff -- 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