Re: best git practices, was Re: Git User's Survey 2007 unfinished summary continued

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Oct 23, 2007, 10:58 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710231155321.25221@racer.site>
In-Reply-To: <92320AA3-6D23-4967-818D-F7FA3962E88D@zib.de>

Hi,

On Tue, 23 Oct 2007, Steffen Prohaska wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> 
> On Oct 23, 2007, at 1:35 AM, Jakub Narebski wrote:
> 
> > 2. Git can do a merge with conflicts _only_ if that branch is checked 
> > out.
> 
> Andreas' proposal contains an important requirement that avoids this 
> problem. His proposal states "when they, prior to fetching, pointed to 
> the same commit [the head in remotes pointed to]". That is only 
> fast-forwards are needed, which never have merge conflicts.

You know what I do not like with this proposal? The whole _point_ of this discussion is to make git _easier_. Go ahead, try to explain to a complete git newbie the proposed behaviour. I have a pound here which says that there is _no_ _way_ that this newbie says "well, that's easy".

Some people may not get this, but git has a reputation of being complicated, and my "BS" argument was, is, and will be, that we should keep clear and simple semantics, because they are the _only_ way to battle that reputation.

Ciao, Dscho