Re: [PATCH v3 1/2] remote: advise about force-pushing as an alternative to reconciliation

From: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
Date: Jul 8, 2023, 18:55 UTC
Message-ID: <CAMMLpeQ2P+qQxo17dEdWhMHcmAfTiBoEifp2wUjWVrP+oGSzxQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <xmqq8rbra9ti.fsf@gitster.g>

On Fri, Jul 7, 2023 at 11:52 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 9 quoted lines

> I would rather see us toning the message down, e.g. "Your branches
> have diverged. **IF** you intend to eventually reconcile the work on
> the remote with yours, you could use `git pull` to do so now" is all
> we should say.  If they do not want to keep the work on the remote,
> at the point of seeing "you have diverged", there is nothing they
> need to do.  There is no need to talk about "push --force" and force
> the user to remember that they have to do so later.  When they try
> "git push", an appropriate message should be given anyway, but that
> is not the message you are touching in this patch.

I would be satisfied with toning down this message as you suggest; you're right that we don't necessarily have to mention force-pushing here. To keep the message short, we could just replace "(use "git pull" to merge the remote branch into yours)" with "(use "git pull" if you want to integrate the remote branch into yours)".

Show 6 quoted lines

> For that matter, it does not make ANY sense to give "you can pull to
> reconcile" message in the comment you are editing the log message
> while running "git commit".  It would be the most inconvenient time
> to do so.  So it might be necessary to first tweak the code so that
> different messages depending on the codepath are shown, perhaps by
> teaching format_tracking_info() who is calling.

I agree, showing this message in the middle of `git commit` is not ideal. However, that's a separate issue that can be fixed later; it's not part of the problem I'm trying to solve in this series.

Thanks for the feedback,

-Alex