From: Petr Baudis Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2006 22:48:07 GMT Subject: Re: git pull fails Message-ID: <20060328224807.GC27689@pasky.or.cz> In-Reply-To: <200603281700.17233.astralstorm@o2.pl> Dear diary, on Tue, Mar 28, 2006 at 05:00:11PM CEST, I got a letter where Radoslaw Szkodzinski said that... > On Tuesday 28 March 2006 16:38, Timo Hirvonen wrote yet: > > Thanks, but forcing everyone to edit their git/remotes/origin file > > is not very nice solution. I think git-fetch should update refs for the > > other non-'broken' branches and leave "pu" and "next" refs untouched. > > How do you know a non-broken branch from something weird? If I understand it right, Timo complains that git-fetch got non-fastforward commits for "pu" and "next" and a good fastforward commit for "master", but it didn't update the ref for ANY head, not even the "master". -- Petr "Pasky" Baudis Stuff: http://pasky.or.cz/ Right now I am having amnesia and deja-vu at the same time. I think I have forgotten this before.