Re: What is missing from Git v2.0

From: David Aguilar <davvid@gmail.com>
Date: Apr 22, 2014, 05:19 UTC
Message-ID: <20140422051918.GC60610@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMP44s17h4Tjg+VaMF0atLep8t-0HVp4UDr1WE2wYnEuZ07eaQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Apr 20, 2014 at 05:41:05PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> = Reject non-fast-forward pulls by default =
> 
> Many new-comers end up making merges by mistake when they pull because
> they don't understand what is a non-fast-forward and what they should
> actually be doing. Most people, even Linus Torvalds, agreed that by
> default `git pull` should fail and guide the user, instead of silently
> making a merge which might not be what the user wants (even though he
> doesn't know it), and messing up the project's history, which affects
> other people.
> 
> The patches were sent, the issues were addressed, people agreed, and
> yet nothing happened.

We can currently set pull.ff = only to get this behavior. I would like it if this were the default (but I am biased).

> = Use "stage" instead of "index" =

I'm probably biased about this one too, but I should probably speak up.

git-cola has used "Staged", "Modified", "Untracked", etc. since the beginning of time. Sorry 'bout that, but it seemed like the simplest word to use.

I often hear users talking about "staging" files. I'm probably in an echo chamber, but I never really had to explain "the staging area" since the concept is pretty natural when interacting with the GUI.

Just my $.02.

ciao,

-- 
David