Re: [PATCH 6/6] Documentation/git-merge.txt: get rid of irrelevant references to git-pull

From: Sergey Organov <sorganov@gmail.com>
Date: Oct 5, 2016, 21:34 UTC
Message-ID: <87shsapjiz.fsf@javad.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqqzimioc7s.fsf@gitster.mtv.corp.google.com>

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> sorganov@gmail.com writes:

[...]

Show 21 quoted lines

>> @@ -138,14 +133,15 @@ will exit early with the message "Already up-to-date."
>>  FAST-FORWARD MERGE
>>  ------------------
>>  
>> -Often the current branch head is an ancestor of the named commit.
>> +Often the current branch head is an ancestor of the named commit.  In
>> +this case, a new commit is not needed to store the combined history;
>> +instead, the `HEAD` (along with the index) is updated to point at the
>> +named commit, without creating an extra merge commit.
>> +
>>  This is the most common case especially when invoked from 'git
>>  pull': you are tracking an upstream repository, you have committed
>>  no local changes, and now you want to update to a newer upstream
>> -revision.  In this case, a new commit is not needed to store the
>> -combined history; instead, the `HEAD` (along with the index) is
>> -updated to point at the named commit, without creating an extra
>> -merge commit.
>> +revision.
>
> I am not sure if the post-image of this hunk is better than the
> original.

That's what I've tried to explain in the description of the patch:

"No awareness of git-pull is required to understand git-merge operation, so leave reference to git-pull only where it actually makes sense, in the description of fast-forward merges, and only as clarification of when this merging behaviour is mostly useful."

So I believe this change is inline with the rest of the patch. The reference to git-pull (if it remains) should be a side-note, not part of explanation of operation.

-- Sergey