Re: Cleaning up git user-interface warts

From: Shawn Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Date: Nov 15, 2006, 23:15 UTC
Message-ID: <20061115231542.GB25270@spearce.org>
In-Reply-To: <20061115180722.83ff8990.seanlkml@sympatico.ca>

Sean <seanlkml@sympatico.ca> wrote:

Show 8 quoted lines

> On Wed, 15 Nov 2006 14:52:32 -0800
> Carl Worth <cworth@cworth.org> wrote:
> 
> > The real fix is to stop glossing over git-merge and just give it a
> > usable syntax.
> 
> Agreed 100%   There's just no good reason to hide the user level
> merge command inside of pull.

So what about making git-merge take a -m "msg" argument to supply the commit message, in which case it does the current behavior (and thus git-pull needs to change to supply -m); and then make git-merge without any -m parameter invoke "git pull . $@" ?

A minor tweak to both apps, a minor breakage to git-merge, but one that I think anyone who invokes it by hand today would find sane (using -m like we do elsewhere) and since the vintage of both git-pull and git-merge should always match shouldn't break anyone who uses git-pull today.