From: Aghiles Date: Mon, 12 Apr 2010 20:18:23 GMT Subject: Re: git pull suggestion Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <7vaataphi7.fsf@alter.siamese.dyndns.org> On Sun, Apr 11, Junio C Hamano wrote: > ... > > The other answer would initially appear a bit sad, but after you think > about it, it would turn into an enlightenment, especially for people whose > brains have rotten from years and years of CVS/SVN use. My brain was rotten even _before_ CVS/SVN use, so you can picture the damage. Now, thank you very much for taking the time to explain everything. I had a vague understanding but now things are clearer. I think that there was a document back in the day, that was giving a relationship between CVS/SVN commands and git. A posteriori, that document did more harm than good: it made you believe that you could use git as CVS/SVN. In practice, that is very difficult and error prone. > Now, the above inevitably solicits "then why doesn't 'pull' automatically > stash and then unstash?" question.  I think the answer is obvious if you > think about it, and it is getting late, so I'll leave that as an exercise > to the readers but will leave a pictorial hint. Before I start thinking I already have a question (which says a lot about my thinking capacity): can't git detect this problematic case ? My feeling is that an automatic stash/unstash will work in most cases and could be triggered by a --dirty flag. -- aghiles