On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 06:25:16PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > W. Trevor King wrote: > > On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 12:48:46PM -0700, W. Trevor King wrote: > > > My interest in all of the proposed git-pull-training-wheel patches is > > > that they give users a way to set a finger-breaking configuration that > > > makes pull a no-op (or slows it down, like 'rm -i …'). Then folks who > > > compulsively run 'git pull' (e.g. because SVN habits die slowly) can > > > set an option that gives them something to think about before going > > > ahead and running the pull anyway. > > > > Actually, what do we think about an -i/--interactive flag (with an > > associated pull.interactive boolean config to setup global/per-repo > > defaults)? Then after the fetch, you'd get one of the following: > > > > Merge $count commits from $repository $refspec into $current_branch? > > Rebase $count commits from $current_branch onto $repository $refpec? > > Not much interactivity in those options. Maybe --prompt would make more > sense. I think matching rm, mv, cp, etc. is good, but I'd be ok with --prompt. > > Fast-forward $current_branch by $count commits to $repository $refpec? > > Why would anyone say 'no' to this one? Because the want explicit merges when they bring in topic branches? > > and have a chance to bail out if you saw: > > > > Merge 1003 commits from git://example.net/main.git master into my-feature? > > > > because you forgot which branch you were on. > > Yes, that might be nice. But we still need to change the defaults. So I should submit an orthogonal patch with -i/--interative/--prompt? Cheers, Trevor -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature