Re: best git practices, was Re: Git User's Survey 2007 unfinished summary continued
- From
Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
- Date
- Oct 24, 2007, 21:06 UTC
- Message-ID
- <471FB3D0.4040800@op5.se>
- In-Reply-To
- <20071024203335.GJ29830@fieldses.org>
J. Bruce Fields wrote:
Show 14 quoted lines
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2007 at 10:12:29PM +0200, Steffen Prohaska wrote: >> On Oct 24, 2007, at 9:48 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote: >> >>>> I want git pull to work like git push. >>> That strikes me as a less complete solution, since it only helps in the >>> case where the other branches all happen to be unmodified locally (hence >>> can be fast-forwarded). In other cases the "git push" will still emit a >>> spurious error. >> Well, but then there's something you should really think >> about. > > Perhaps, but not necessarily; you may have some branches with local > changes that you're content to leave unpushed (and un-updated). >
Sure, but that won't change. The only thing I'm proposing is that local copies of remote branches are automatically fast-forwarded on every pull, but only if
* the branch has no modifications what so ever * the branch is set up to auto-merge with the particular branch fetched from the particular remote
I really don't see any downsides what so ever with this. Those of you who do, please enlighten me.
> - the user has one or more unmodified copies of remote branches > lying around, and
Extremely common case for a large group of users. The worst part is that this problem can get extremely annoying pretty quickly, with a large number of repos and a large number of branches, whereas the one dev per repo folks will never have big worries about it.
-- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231