From: Andreas Ericsson Date: Thu, 29 Nov 2007 08:36:00 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] Teach 'git pull' about --rebase Message-ID: <474E79F0.4080101@op5.se> In-Reply-To: <7v1waa2bfi.fsf@gitster.siamese.dyndns.org> Junio C Hamano wrote: > Johannes Schindelin writes: > >> So my rationale was: if we already have an existing framework to integrate >> remote changes with our current branch, why not just go ahead and use it? >> That's the reason BTW why I originally wanted a "rebase" merge stragegy. >> Even if it is not technically a merge. >> >> I really rather have no user-friendly support for fetch+rebase (and utter >> a friendly, but loud curse everytime I made a "git pull" by mistake) than >> yet another command. > > I suspect that people who do not like the two modes of checkout will > certainly not appreciate the overloading two behaviours to create > different kind of histories and two different ways to continue when the > integration do not go smoothly upon conflicts these two behaviours have. > > However, I agree very much with an earlier comment made by Daniel about > our UI being task oriented instead of being command oriented, and I > actually consider it a good thing. So it does not bother me too much > that "git pull --rebase" has a quite different workflow from the regular > "merge" kind of pull. > > So let's queue "pull --rebase" and see what happens. > I've used the --rebase option to git pull, explained it to my co-workers and also made sure they're using a version of git that has it. So far there hasn't been a single complaint about "git pull" being any harder to grok. -- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se Tel: +46 8-230225 Fax: +46 8-230231