From: Mathias Kunter Date: Mon, 31 May 2021 13:03:37 GMT Subject: Re: Default behavior of git pull Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <92682abb-3062-4613-399d-a3279afb8f0b@gmail.com> Hi Bagas, thanks for your reply. > Since you do centralized workflow like above, I advise you to integrate > from remote with git fetch + git merge. I'm aware of this. However, if I know that I didn't commit any changes to the local branch since I last pushed it (as in the given example), then it should be possible to use a simple "git pull" IMHO. It seems unnecessarily complex to me that users would have to use "git pull origin fix-1" in this situation, when a simple "git pull" could also work. Am 31.05.21 um 13:27 schrieb Bagas Sanjaya: > Hi Mathias, > > On 31/05/21 16.18, Mathias Kunter wrote: >> Wouldn't it make sense if "git pull" would by default also pull the >> branch with the same name from the remote, in case no upstream is >> configured? >> >> If I can push to a remote with a simple "git push", then I'd also >> expect to be able to pull from that same remote with a simple "git pull". >> >> Does anything speak against this? >> >> Example: >> >>    git clone $url >>    git checkout -b fix-1 >>    # do commits >>    git push           # push to origin/fix-1 (works) >>    git push origin    # push to origin/fix-1 (works) >>    # other people push to origin/fix-1 >>    git pull           # pull from origin/fix-1 (fails) >>    git pull origin    # pull from origin/fix-1 (fails) > > IME, I did git fetch first before I did git pull, unless I have repos > that I didn't intentionally want to contribute to (just collecting > them). When I choose to work, I always create a branch, then submit > PR/patches from that against mainline. > > Since you do centralized workflow like above, I advise you to integrate > from remote with git fetch + git merge. > > And you asked whether plain git pull can work. It is yes, provided that > you don't do any local work on remote-tracking branches (such as > mainline or hotfixes). >