From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 04 Oct 2010 21:06:17 GMT
Subject: Re: Useful tracking branches and auto merging
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=nsv58ai1G6DhN935FY20U3AAjSC3OoitB-8st@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20101004205725.GJ6466@burratino>

On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
> Felipe Contreras wrote:
>> On Mon, Oct 4, 2010 at 11:46 PM, Jonathan Nieder <jrnieder@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> git merge @{u}
>>
>> Interesting, I don't find anything like that in the documentation.
>
> The @{upstream} notation is documented in gitrevisions(7).  But yes,
> a more prominent mention (maybe some examples?) would be nice.
>
>> Moreover, wouldn't it make sense to make 'git merge' = 'git merge
>> @{u}'?
>
> I think so, yes. :)

Great :)

> If I remember correctly, the current status is:
>
>  - 'git remote' is for adding, removing, and pruning remotes
>  - 'git fetch <remote>' and 'git fetch --all' are for updating them, and
>  - 'git remote update' is for backward compatibility.

Oh, I thought 'git remote update' was newer. If 'git fetch --all' is
supposed to be used instead, then I guess 'git pull --all' makes
sense, but personally I would like it to error out if the merge is not
fast-forward.

Cheers.

-- 
Felipe Contreras