On Tue, Jul 4, 2023 at 3:52 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > Also, don't imply that `git pull` is only for merging.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@xxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > remote.c | 4 +++-
> > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/remote.c b/remote.c
> > index a81f2e2f17..009034ecde 100644
> > --- a/remote.c
> > +++ b/remote.c
> > @@ -2323,7 +2323,9 @@ int format_tracking_info(struct branch *branch, struct strbuf *sb,
> > base, ours, theirs);
> > if (advice_enabled(ADVICE_STATUS_HINTS))
> > strbuf_addstr(sb,
> > - _(" (use \"git pull\" to merge the remote branch into yours)\n"));
> > + _(" (use \"git pull\" to reconcile your local branch with the remote branch,\n"
> > + " or \"git push --force-with-lease\" to overwrite the remote branch with\n"
> > + " your local branch)\n"));
> > }
> > free(base);
> > return 1;
>
> Use of --force-with-lease without which commit you assume to be at
> the tip of their branch is just as risky as blind use of --force.
>
> As I said in a separate message, I do not think "reconcile" and
> "force" cannot both be sensible choices at the same time. If the
> user wants not to lose the work by themselves and by others,
> reconciling would be the only sensible choice and forcing cannot be
> a sane substitute for that (if the user knows what is at the tip of
> central repository is wrong and wants to get rid of it, forcing
> would be a very sensible choice, but then reconciling would not be a
> subsitute for that in such a case---"merge --ours" does not count as
> "reconciling").
>
> So, I'd suggest to make it a bit more clear that they are not
> alternatives in the message, and discourage forcing in the first
> place by using not "overwrite" but a bit stronger word, like discard
> or destroy. e.g.
>
> To reconcile your local changes with the work at the remote, you
> can use 'git pull' and then 'git push'. To discard the work at
> the remote and replace it with what you did (alone), you can use
> 'git push --force'.
>
> or something, perhaps.
I think we're splitting hairs about what the word "alternative" means.
The user has two ways to get their work onto the remote branch:
Reconcile it with what's already there, or delete what's already
there. I would call those two ways "alternatives" and that does not
imply that either one is always a sensible choice, but if you can
think of a word that's more clear, I'm happy to use it instead in
these commit messages.
At any rate, your proposed wording for the advice message in remote.c
is perfectly fine. Thanks, I'll use it in v3. Would you like the same
text in push.c, or was my proposed text there already OK?
-Alex
