Re: pull --preserve-merges

From: Stephen Haberman <stephen@exigencecorp.com>
Date: Nov 10, 2008, 19:05 UTC
Message-ID: <20081110130518.3eb64ceb.stephen@exigencecorp.com>
In-Reply-To: <20081107160138.aa96405c.stephen@exigencecorp.com>

Show 13 quoted lines

> Awhile ago I brought up wanting to have a "rebase with preserve merges"
> option for `git pull`:
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/96513
>
> Andreas had a patch to help by supporting manually typing out `git pull
> --rebase --preserve-merges`:
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/96593
>
> And then I did another small copy/paste patch on top to add a config
> setting of `branch.<name>.preservemerges` much like the existing
> `branch.<name>.rebase`.

I just noticed the `branch.<name>.mergeoptions` flag in the merge docs. Instead of having both `branch.<name>.rebase` and `.preservemerges`, and possibly even more config parameters for whatever other people what to configure as well, would something like `branch.<name>.pulloptions` be a better idea?

In our case, we could then set all the `branch.<name>.pulloptions` to "--rebase --preserve-merges" (likely via a post-checkout hook) and be happy with `git pull` "just working".

Adding pulloptions would make the patch a little bit trickier, for me to implement anyway, and I assume the rebase flag would have to stay for backwards compatibility, but if a pulloptions config parameter approach would be more acceptable than an explicit preservemerges config (and hence more likely to get the patches accepted), I'd be willing to work on that.

Thanks, Stephen