From: Michael Haggerty Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2014 07:56:40 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/9] fetch doc: update note on '+' in front of the refspec Message-ID: <53A14638.4060403@alum.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <1401833792-2486-4-git-send-email-gitster@pobox.com> On 06/04/2014 12:16 AM, Junio C Hamano wrote: > While it is not *wrong* per-se to say that pulling a rewound/rebased > branch will lead to an unnecessary merge conflict, that is not what > the leading "+" sign to allow non-fast-forward update of remote-tracking > branch is at all. > > Helped-by: Marc Branchaud > Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano > --- > Documentation/pull-fetch-param.txt | 18 +++++++++--------- > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/Documentation/pull-fetch-param.txt b/Documentation/pull-fetch-param.txt > index 18cffc2..41474c5 100644 > --- a/Documentation/pull-fetch-param.txt > +++ b/Documentation/pull-fetch-param.txt > @@ -24,15 +24,15 @@ is updated even if it does not result in a fast-forward > update. > + > [NOTE] > -If the remote branch from which you want to pull is > -modified in non-linear ways such as being rewound and > -rebased frequently, then a pull will attempt a merge with > -an older version of itself, likely conflict, and fail. > -It is under these conditions that you would want to use > -the `+` sign to indicate non-fast-forward updates will > -be needed. There is currently no easy way to determine > -or declare that a branch will be made available in a > -repository with this behavior; the pulling user simply > +When the remote branch you want to fetch is known to > +be rewound and rebased regularly, it is expected that > +its new tip will not be descendant of its previous tip s/will not be descendant/will not be a descendant/ to fix a typo, and maybe s/will not be descendant/will sometimes not be a descendant/ because sometimes it *will* be a descendant. > +(as stored in your remote-tracking branch the last time > +you fetched). You would want > +to use the `+` sign to indicate non-fast-forward updates > +will be needed for such branches. There is no way to > +determine or declare that a branch will be made available > +in a repository with this behavior; the pulling user simply > must know this is the expected usage pattern for a branch. > + > [NOTE] > -- Michael Haggerty mhagger@alum.mit.edu http://softwareswirl.blogspot.com/