Show 40 quoted lines
> Le 15 oct. 2025 à 09:13, Julia Evans via GitGitGadget <gitgitgadget@gmail.com> a écrit :
>
> I got feedback from 15 Git users on the current git pull man page, using
> this tool: https://text-feedback.wizardzines.com/git-pull.
>
> My goals here are to be clear about the relationship between git pull and
> fetch/merge/rebase etc, make sure users know the current default for git
> pull (--ff-only) since some folks still remember the old default, and to
> help users quickly figure out what command they need to run to
> merge/rebase/squash/etc.
>
> I've taken a pretty aggressive approach because I think it's possible to
> have a pretty short and focused DESCRIPTION section here while keeping the
> most important info. Open to hearing that I've removed too much.
>
> This references the UPSTREAM BRANCHES section from
> https://lore.kernel.org/git/0ec629d4037bf5d1ccc248ca1bbd87ccc08119a3.1757703309.git.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/
> , so if that isn't merged I'll need to revisit the approach here.
>
> changes in v2:
>
> * Add "(excluding merge options)" to clarify which options are passed to
> git fetch (from Chris's review)
> * Say that git pull will by default merge the upstream branch. (from
> Chris's review)
> * Add some links to the UPSTREAM BRANCHES section, and to the <refspec>
> section in git fetch, to make it easier to navigate in the HTML version
> of the docs at least. The situation where we repeat the <repository> part
> in git fetch is weird but I don't have a better idea for how to handle it
> right now. The UPSTREAM BRANCHES links are currently failing the
> documentation tests, but should pass once the patch series that adds that
> is merged. (from Ben's review)
>
> changes in v3:
>
> Change "fails if the local branch has diverged" to say "remote branch has
> diverged", from Junio's review.
>
> I did not come up with a better idea for a word to use than "integrate" so
> left that alone.
Ben Knoble <ben.knoble@gmail.com>