Re: git pull opinion
- From
Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
- Date
- Nov 6, 2007, 00:54 UTC
- Message-ID
- <472FBB3F.8080307@op5.se>
- In-Reply-To
- <18223.46848.109961.552827@lisa.zopyra.com>
Bill Lear wrote:
Show 29 quoted lines
> On Monday, November 5, 2007 at 15:33:31 (-0800) Junio C Hamano writes: >> Aghiles <aghilesk@gmail.com> writes: >> >>> Is there an "easier" way to pull into a dirty directory ? I am >>> asking this to make sure I understand the problem and not >>> because I find it annoying to type those 4 commands to perform >>> a pull (although some of my colleagues do find that annoying :). >> You need to switch your mindset from centralized SVN workflow. >> >> The beauty of distributedness is that it redefines the meaning >> of "to commit". In distributed systems, the act of committing >> is purely checkpointing and it is not associated with publishing >> the result to others as centralized systems force you to. >> >> Stop thinking like "I need to integrate the changes from >> upstream into my WIP to keep up to date." You first finish what >> you are currently doing, at least to the point that it is >> stable, make a commit to mark that state, and then start >> thinking about what other people did. You may most likely do a >> "git fetch" followed by "git rebase" to update your WIP on top >> of the updated work by others. >> >> Once you get used to that, you would not have "a dirty >> directory" problem. > > I respectfully beg to differ. I think it is entirely reasonable, and > not a sign of "centralized" mindset, to want to pull changes others > have made into your dirty repository with a single command. >
I find it much more convenient to just fetch them. I'd rather see git-pull being given a --rebase option (which would ultimately mean teaching git-merge about it) to rebase already committed changes on top of the newly fetched tracking branch. It's being worked on, but rather slowly.
-- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231