Re: best git practices, was Re: Git User's Survey 2007 unfinished summary continued

From: Federico Mena Quintero <federico@novell.com>
Date: Oct 22, 2007, 19:36 UTC
Message-ID: <1193081785.4522.181.camel@cacharro.xalalinux.org>
In-Reply-To: <471CBEB1.2030008@op5.se>

On Mon, 2007-10-22 at 17:16 +0200, Andreas Ericsson wrote:

Show 6 quoted lines

> To me, it's more along the lines of "let git help me not make the 
> mistake of hacking on a six-week old codebase when I've explicitly asked 
> it to merge these and those remote tracking branches into these and 
> those local branches". Not updating those branches when there *are* 
> changes on them is something users can understand and will probably also 
> appreciate, but the reason for not allowing even fast-forwards escape me.

I'd love this behavior, FWIW.

The "branches should not track their origin by default" seems suited only to Linux kernel maintainers who frequently pull from many different people, not to "random hacker who wants to keep track of a project he doesn't maintain" :)

  Federico