Re: [PATCH 8/9] pull: update docs & code for option compatibility with rebasing
- From
Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
- Date
- Jul 21, 2021, 01:25 UTC
- Message-ID
- <xmqqr1fse9vu.fsf@gitster.g>
- In-Reply-To
- <CABPp-BGkiNfy4s9uxFWPYfqVRLj3rT10pJuARW9e3tPrkDbS9w@mail.gmail.com>
Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> writes:
Show 10 quoted lines
>> > +Note that `--ff-only` takes precedence over any `--rebase` flag. >> > ++ >> >> "`ff-only` overrides any `--rebase` flag"? > > Yeah, ignore that, I had already ripped it out after your comments on > patch 1 yesterday. I've also got more changes to the pull > documentation to try to do more of what your sentence above says, > "covering these interactions and whipping them into a much better > shape."
OK. After thinking about it further, "overrides" is not the word, either, I guess. It is more like that there are "merge", "rebase" and "fast-forward-only" for the user to choose from, with "merge" having two sub-variants (i.e. what happens when we do not have any development of our own) and "rebase" with a few sub-variants (i.e. interactive? shape-preserving?).
In any case, when the user says "I'll take nothing but fast-forward update to their history", it is a bug if we did not fail when their history is not a descendant of ours, and we have already fixed it in an earlier part of the series. This would be a good place to clarify what the correct behaviour ought to be, if the existing documentation is not already.
Thanks.