Re: Do most people feel tracking branches useful?

From: Liu Yubao <yubao.liu@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 29, 2008, 10:22 UTC
Message-ID: <49083957.2060702@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <49083166.7090804@op5.se>

Andreas Ericsson wrote:

Show 5 quoted lines

> Liu Yubao wrote:
> 
> Use "git fetch" instead of "git pull" and you won't need the 'my' branch.
> If you use "git pull --rebase" you won't need to bother at all.
>

Thank you very much, I didn't know the "--rebase" option, now I learn the 'branch.<name>.rebase' configuration too by "git help pull".

[...snip...]

Show 5 quoted lines

> 
> I can't understand why you're working so hard for a linear history, but
> perhaps
> that's just an effect of only having leaf developers. I also can't
> understand

You got it exactly, we are leaf developers and make enhancement mostly, we don't want the upstream branch full of merging commit for many not so major changes. I remember keeping linear history is recommended in git's documentation.

Show 7 quoted lines

> why you'd want to sync with upstream at all if you're just working on a
> single
> feature/bugfix at the time, since you'd probably be better off by just
> completing
> that single feature in your own time and doing "git pull --rebase && git
> push"
> when you're done.

I only sync when I have finished my enhancement, I don't like merging when pull.

Yes, I'd better use "git pull --rebase", "pull" is a wonderful command: pull = fetch + merge, pull --rebase = fetch + rebase, wow!