On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 14:50:35 -0500, Michael Poole wrote: > Jan Hudec writes: > > > The basic pull/push actions are: > > > > git pull: Bring the remote ref value here. > > git push: Put the local ref value there. > > > > Are those not oposites? > > > > Than each command has it's different features on top of this -- pull merges > > and push can push multiple refs -- but in the basic operation they are > > oposites. > > I think that is in absolute agreement with David: Ducks swim on the > surface of the water and lobsters swim underneath. Why consider the > different features on top of where they swim? > > The thing about git-pull that surprises so many users is the merge. > There's a separate command to do that step, and git-pull had a fairly > good excuse to do the merge before git's 1.5.x remote system was in > place, but now the only really defensible reason for its behavior is > history. When I first looked at hg -- and that was long before I looked at git -- I was surprised that their pull did NOT merge and you had to do a separate step. Partly because doing those two steps is quite common. -- Jan 'Bulb' Hudec <bulb@xxxxxx>
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
