Hi Felipe, On 24/06/2021 15:31, Felipe Contreras wrote: > Philip Oakley wrote: >> On 21/06/2021 18:52, Felipe Contreras wrote: >>> --- a/Documentation/git-pull.txt >>> +++ b/Documentation/git-pull.txt >>> @@ -41,16 +41,41 @@ Assume the following history exists and the current branch is >>> ------------ >>> A---B---C master on origin >>> / >>> - D---E---F---G master >>> + D---E master >>> ^ >>> origin/master in your repository >>> ------------ >>> >>> Then "`git pull`" will fetch and replay the changes from the remote >>> `master` branch since it diverged from the local `master` (i.e., `E`) >>> -until its current commit (`C`) on top of `master` and record the >>> -result in a new commit along with the names of the two parent commits >>> -and a log message from the user describing the changes. >>> +until its current commit (`C`) on top of `master`. >>> + >>> +After the remote changes have been synchronized, the local `master` will >>> +be fast-forwarded to the same commit as the remote one, therefore >> Perhaps s/be fast-forwarded/have been 'fast-forward'ed/ ? > No, there's multiple steps: My key point was to 'quote' the fast-forward term. And then (if suitable, with appropriate grammar corrections) indicate subtly that 'nothing actually moved', we just moved the post-it note showing the branch-name on the DAG [hence the confusion about timing] ;-) > > 1. origin/master is synchronizd with master on origin > 2. master is fast-forwarded to origin/master > > So, after 1 is done, 2 will happen. > -- Philip
