Re: pull/merge --no-commit

From: kurt_p_lloyd <kplloyd@alcatel-lucent.com>
Date: Jun 7, 2007, 20:32 UTC
Message-ID: <46686B63.6080808@alcatel-lucent.com>
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.0.99.0706080658070.6319@sleipnir.no.net.nz>

Many thanks to Junio, Kevin, and Keith for the helpful comments. I'll give some play time to all of these suggestions :)

One thing I was thinking might be useful would be a command to make (just) my repository unavailable for 'fetch' or 'pull' from others, temporarily. And then a command to make it available again, after I finish things that could end up needing "database" surgery, like maybe something that could result in having to do a git reset. I was thinking maybe something like:

   $ git config maintenance true
   .... do something that may end up needing "database" surgery
   $ git config maintenance false

Just an idea.  Of course, if something like this already exists ....
(I'd rather not shut down sshd, nor have to create a separate "public"
  repository (for certain types of "projects" anyway).)

-Kurt

Keith Duthie wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On Thu, 7 Jun 2007, kurt_p_lloyd wrote:
> 
>> Except here's the model that I am trying to follow....
>> It seems that 'pull' can be partitioned into 3 separate responsibilities:
>>
>>   1. Retrieve changes from the remote user's replica (without modifying
>>      any /local/ branches).
>>   2. Bring changes from "remote" into a local branch (without commit).
>>   3. Commit.
> 
> I believe you can accomplish step one with a remote tracking branch
> ("git-remote add localname git://whereever/project.git" to add the branch
> to the repository, then "git-remote update localname" to update it to the
> current remote state).