Re: git pull opinion

> Bill Lear wrote:
> > On Monday, November 5, 2007 at 15:33:31 (-0800) Junio C Hamano writes:
> > > Aghiles <aghilesk@gmail.com> writes:
> > > 
> > > > Is there an "easier" way to pull into a dirty directory ? I am
> > > > asking this to make sure I understand the problem and not
> > > > because I find it annoying to type those 4 commands to perform
> > > > a pull (although some of my colleagues do find that annoying :).
> > > You need to switch your mindset from centralized SVN workflow.
> > > 
> > > The beauty of distributedness is that it redefines the meaning
> > > of "to commit".  In distributed systems, the act of committing
> > > is purely checkpointing and it is not associated with publishing
> > > the result to others as centralized systems force you to.
> > > 
> > > Stop thinking like "I need to integrate the changes from
> > > upstream into my WIP to keep up to date."  You first finish what
> > > you are currently doing, at least to the point that it is
> > > stable, make a commit to mark that state, and then start
> > > thinking about what other people did.  You may most likely do a
> > > "git fetch" followed by "git rebase" to update your WIP on top
> > > of the updated work by others.
> > > 
> > > Once you get used to that, you would not have "a dirty
> > > directory" problem.
> > 
> > I respectfully beg to differ.  I think it is entirely reasonable, and
> > not a sign of "centralized" mindset, to want to pull changes others
> > have made into your dirty repository with a single command.
> > 
> 
> I find it much more convenient to just fetch them. I'd rather see
> git-pull being given a --rebase option (which would ultimately mean
> teaching git-merge about it) to rebase already committed changes on
> top of the newly fetched tracking branch. It's being worked on, but
> rather slowly.