On Wed, Jul 21, 2021 at 08:24:25PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > I'm not trashing the current behavior, I'm explaining what the consensus > is. I spent several man-days re-reading old threads, and this is the > consensus of what should happen: > > 1. git pull # merge HEAD into upstream > 2. git pull origin topic # merge topic into HEAD > > Of the people that expressed an opinion, 100% of them stated that what > `git pull` does in the first case today is not desirable. I did not participate in the threads you linked earlier, so I am probably not in that 100%. But you did use my name below: > Yes, you are correct that if *everyone* followed the topic branch > workflow, everything would work correctly, but that's not what happens > in reality, in reality people do all kinds of workflows, and wrong > merges are pervasive. > > Everyone--including Linus, Jeff, and you--agree that there's two > different ways of using `git pull`: integrator versus developer. > > When a user is doing `git pull` to synchronize changes to push to the > same branch, that's a centralized two-way workflow, so he is acting both > as an integrator and as a developer, and it's in that particular case > that the order of the parents should be reversed. Everyone agrees on > that. > > When the user the opposite explicitely: `git pull origin master` > Linus calls it a "back-merge" [1], and in that case the order of the > parents should not be reversed. So I feel compelled to say now that I do not think that changing the order of parents for "git pull" is the obviously correct thing to do. And likewise, in the one thread I do remember participating in, I expressed something similar: https://lore.kernel.org/git/20140502214817.GA10801@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ -Peff
