[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: the "r" in "git pull -r"

From: Trevor Daniels
Subject: Re: the "r" in "git pull -r"
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 08:45:22 +0100

Graham Percival wrote Monday, August 10, 2009 12:48 AM

On Sun, Aug 09, 2009 at 11:45:05PM +0200, John Mandereau wrote:
Le samedi 08 août 2009 à 13:55 -0600, Carl Sorensen a écrit :
> As a practical matter, -r first applies the changes that were > made on origin > (since your branch was checked out), then applies your changes > on top of the > current origin. The prevents an extra commit to merge your > branch with
> origin, and keeps the git history cleaner.
> My recommendation is to always use it; it makes things much > nicer.

I agree, except when docs in English are edited and translations
committishes are updated before edited docs in English are pushed.

Mao.  So that means that we don't want to add
 git config --global branch.autosetuprebase always
to the git setup, and we still have to tell people to do
 git pull -r
instead of
 git pull
?  And even worse, the difference between those two commands
depends on what kind of update the contributor is working on?!

I maoing hate git.

Git is fine; the complexity comes from the
baroque structures in LilyPond.  Let's be
thankful Git has tools to cope :)

Actually I think it's a big mistake to encourage
folk to use Git features without understanding
what they do.  Taking the time to understand is
just a one off; not understanding is a recipe for
continually wasting time fighting mysterious
happenings and cursing git.

As you said, there are plenty of git tutorials
on the web; it's really no big deal for would-be
contributors to read them.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]