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

From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Oct 24, 2007, 22:17 UTC
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0710242315310.25221@racer.site>
In-Reply-To: <471FBF29.8030802@op5.se>

Hi,

On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Andreas Ericsson wrote:

> Conceptually, I don't think it'll be any problem what so ever telling 
> anyone that the branches that aren't currently checked out get merged 
> automatically only if they result in a fast-forward.

It would be a matter of seconds until someone asks "why only fast-forwards? Would it not be _much_ better to merge _always_? Stupid git."

And all because the concept of "local" vs "remote" was blurred.

Ciao, Dscho

$ cat FOOTERMessages come from the public archive at lore.kernel.org/git, fetched every hour. The front page is chosen and written each morning by an AI editor and can be wrong; the threads themselves are the record. About and API. For agents: an MCP server at https://gitlist.dev/mcp, and any thread, story or person page as Markdown by adding .md to its URL (or sending Accept: text/markdown). Details in /llms.txt.