From: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 19:48:19 GMT
Subject: Re: pull --preserve-merges
Message-ID: <alpine.DEB.1.00.0811102047130.30769@pacific.mpi-cbg.de>
In-Reply-To: <20081110130518.3eb64ceb.stephen@exigencecorp.com>

Hi,

On Mon, 10 Nov 2008, Stephen Haberman wrote:

> [citing someone, presumably himself]
>
> > Awhile ago I brought up wanting to have a "rebase with preserve 
> > merges" option for `git pull`:
> >
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/96513
> >
> > Andreas had a patch to help by supporting manually typing out `git 
> > pull --rebase --preserve-merges`:
> >
> > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/96593
> >
> > And then I did another small copy/paste patch on top to add a config 
> > setting of `branch.<name>.preservemerges` much like the existing 
> > `branch.<name>.rebase`.
> 
> I just noticed the `branch.<name>.mergeoptions` flag in the merge docs.
> Instead of having both `branch.<name>.rebase` and `.preservemerges`, and
> possibly even more config parameters for whatever other people what to
> configure as well, would something like `branch.<name>.pulloptions` be a
> better idea?

Or we can stay backwards-compatible and support

	[branch "<name">]
		rebase = preserve-merges

Ciao,
Dscho