Re: Cleaning up git user-interface warts
- From
- Josef Weidendorfer <josef.weidendorfer@gmx.de>
- Date
- Nov 15, 2006, 21:12 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200611152212.35978.Josef.Weidendorfer@gmx.de>
- In-Reply-To
- <20061115203517.GN7201@pasky.or.cz>
On Wednesday 15 November 2006 21:35, Petr Baudis wrote:
Show 8 quoted lines
> On Wed, Nov 15, 2006 at 09:31:13PM CET, Josef Weidendorfer wrote: > > Often, I find myself doing "git branch" just to make sure that I am on > > "master", so that a following pull does not do a bogus merge. > > > > Can we please disable this behavior, e.g. by allowing a fake first > > Pull line like "Pull: (not-for-merge)" to prohibit any merge? > > Wait, if you don't want pull to merge, why do you pull and not fetch?
I am not really opposed to pull doing a merge. It only should work in a useful way: ie. only do the merge of updated origin branch when current branch is master (given "Pull: master:origin").
I want "git pull" being harmless if I find myself accidently on a branch != master. I always can do "git checkout master; git pull . origin" afterwards.
For this to work, I currently need to specify a "branch.<name>.merge" config for _every_ branch I have, as otherwise I get this bogus pull merge behavior. This is not needed if there was a way to configure no merge at all as default pull behavior.
I just noted that allowing such a config option would be kind of a working compromise for all the people which want pull to be the opposite of push.