On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 7:51 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 08 2019, Duy Nguyen wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 8, 2019 at 8:34 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > >> > >> Damien Robert <damien.olivier.robert@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> > >> > is there a way to do a git pull without it running git fetch? > >> > Looking at the source in builtin/pull.c does not seem to indicate so. > >> > >> The reason behind that is because it does not make any sense for > >> "pull", which is meant as a quick short-cut to say "fetch && merge", > >> not to run fetch, especially back then when 'git pull' was designed, > >> the world was much simpler. There was no "fetch && rebase", our > >> branches did not know what their @{upstream}s were. In that simpler > >> world, what you are trying to do would have been: > >> > >> git fetch > >> # did I get anything worth integrating? > >> git merge FETCH_HEAD > >> > >> That obviously would not work for those with "pull.rebase", and I do > >> not think it makes much sense to teach "git rebase" the same trick > >> to read FETCH_HEAD as "git merge" does in the above sequence. > >> > >> Others may have a better idea, but I do not immediately see any > >> solution better than inventing a new option to "git pull". > >> > >> Another and better option that may be harder to arrange is to make > >> sure that a no-op "git fetch" incurs very low cost. If you did so, > > > > Not exactly related. But I often wish to see the list of branch > > updates since the last fetch. There's no easy way (that I know) to do > > this unless you copy the last fetch's output somewhere. If this "fetch > > at low cost" could simply read FETCH_HEAD and summarizes it like a > > normal fetch, that would be great. And it should also be very low cost > > because we only replay the last part (making summary) of normal fetch. > > The ability to have this is something reftables will provide (from my > memory of a comment by Stefan Beller), which Christian Couder is working > on implementing these days. I don't think we even need reftables to implement it. The list of new SHA-1 is available in FETCH_HEAD (at least until the next fetch), and from reflog we know the old SHA-1 (or a new branch/tag, I think we know too). -- Duy