Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Andreas Ericsson wrote:
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, Andreas Ericsson wrote:
If I were to suggest any improvements, it'd be to change the
semantics of git-pull to always update the local branches set up to
be merged with the remote tracking branches when they, prior to
fetching, pointed to the same commit, such that when
$ git show-ref master
d4027a816dd0b416dc8c7b37e2c260e6905f11b6 refs/heads/master
d4027a816dd0b416dc8c7b37e2c260e6905f11b6 refs/remotes/origin/master
refs/heads/master gets set to refs/remotes/origin/master post-fetch.
In general, this should fail. Because you are expected to have local
changes in the local branches.
BS argument.
Aha. So you want to make sure that the local branches are no longer
"purely" local. And you want to stop updating them when unpushed changes
are in the local branches.
To me, it's more along the lines of "let git help me not make the
mistake of hacking on a six-week old codebase when I've explicitly asked
it to merge these and those remote tracking branches into these and
those local branches". Not updating those branches when there *are*
changes on them is something users can understand and will probably also
appreciate, but the reason for not allowing even fast-forwards escape me.
Seems I cannot help you.
Well, I knew that much from the start so I didn't ask you to, and since
you seem to fail to grasp what I had in mind, I'm sure you'd botch the
implementation anyway. Thanks for not quite offering though ;-)
I'm sure you'll review the patch though, and I'm equally sure I will
appreciate your technical comments rather a lot more than this current
bickering about a feature it seems I can't express clearly enough in words.
--
Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@xxxxxx
OP5 AB www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231
-
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
