From: Junio C Hamano Date: Thu, 09 Oct 2025 22:41:01 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/4] doc: git-pull: clarify options for integrating remote branch Message-ID: In-Reply-To: "Julia Evans" writes: > My assumption was that the word "integrate" was meant to be a generic > way to communicate "combine the changes in the two branches in > some unspecified way", and that's how I was using it. It is how I was using it, too. > I'm not sure what > you mean when you say "integrate" (is it "merge"?). Not limited to "merge", but I view it more as between two parties, one side supplies changes while the other side serves as a base. A merge looks as if the changes of a side branch gets incorporated into the trunk. A rebase looks as if the changes you have created gets incorporated into the trunk by replaying them onto the trunk. > 1. Try to find a different word that communicates "combine the two > branches in a way that you have to specify". I'm not sure how > likely this is to succeed. I am not particularly good at finding verbs, sorry. > 2. Instead of using the word "integrate", instead always say something > like "merge or rebase". I tried this but I found it a bit unwieldy, and > I think it might also be confusing for users who aren't familiar with > both merge and rebase, they might worry "do I need to understand > rebase to use `git pull`?", when of course you don't. Very true.