On 11-06-08 23:49, Mikael Magnusson wrote:
For me, git-pull is that additional command, and using git-pull .
<branch> to merge feels really really strange. Why would I pull
something I already have?
For what it's worth I (as thread starter) agree with this. At least in
my mind local and remote branches are very different and I do not mind
having to "fetch" the latter first before merging (nor combine the two
through a "pull").
I can see the reason for the other viewpoint as well since it emphasises
a point about local and remote branches _not_ being very different after
all but that's more a symmetry to the implementor than it is to a user I
feel. For the user, local and remote branches just are different.
And as such I feel it actually helps to just use "merge". Thanks for the
answers everyone -- this was a matter of a user worrying that he wasn't
getting it...
Rene
--
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
