# "git-pull --no-commit" should imply --no-ff...? 4 messages from 2008-06-21 to 2008-06-22. Participants: Stefan Richter, Graham Wilson, Miklos Vajna. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/14073 ## Stefan Richter, 2008-06-21 14:08 Subject: "git-pull --no-commit" should imply --no-ff...? Message-ID: URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/tkrat.5aa5af8e9968819c%40s5r6.in-berlin.de ``` Hi list, trying "git pull --no-commit . foo" for the first time, I was confused that --no-commit was a no-op when the pull resulted in a fast-forward. I.e. HEAD advanced the whole chain of commits to foo. I expected it to apply the diff of HEAD..foo but not commit them. I then learned that "git pull --no-ff --no-commit . foo" does what I wanted. What good does it do to ignore --no-commit in the fast-forward case unless --no-ff is given? This is with git 1.5.4.5. -- Stefan Richter -=====-==--- -==- =-=-= http://arcgraph.de/sr/ ``` ## Graham Wilson, 2008-06-22 13:36 Subject: Re: "git-pull --no-commit" should imply --no-ff...? Message-ID: <20080622133606.GA21828@endor.mknod.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20080622133606.GA21828%40endor.mknod.org In-Reply-To: ``` On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 04:08:51PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote: > trying "git pull --no-commit . foo" for the first time, I was confused > that --no-commit was a no-op when the pull resulted in a fast-forward. > I.e. HEAD advanced the whole chain of commits to foo. I expected it to > apply the diff of HEAD..foo but not commit them. --no-commit to me seems to mean don't commit a merge commit. Maybe what you want is something like: git-diff HEAD foo | git-apply -- gram ``` ## Miklos Vajna, 2008-06-22 13:49 Subject: Re: "git-pull --no-commit" should imply --no-ff...? Message-ID: <20080622134946.GL29404@genesis.frugalware.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20080622134946.GL29404%40genesis.frugalware.org In-Reply-To: <20080622133606.GA21828@endor.mknod.org> ``` On Sun, Jun 22, 2008 at 08:36:06AM -0500, Graham Wilson wrote: > On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 04:08:51PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote: > > trying "git pull --no-commit . foo" for the first time, I was confused > > that --no-commit was a no-op when the pull resulted in a fast-forward. > > I.e. HEAD advanced the whole chain of commits to foo. I expected it to > > apply the diff of HEAD..foo but not commit them. > > --no-commit to me seems to mean don't commit a merge commit. Maybe what > you want is something like: > > git-diff HEAD foo | git-apply Or git merge --no-commit --squash? ``` ## Stefan Richter, 2008-06-22 14:01 Subject: Re: "git-pull --no-commit" should imply --no-ff...? Message-ID: <485E5B57.5000307@s5r6.in-berlin.de> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/485E5B57.5000307%40s5r6.in-berlin.de In-Reply-To: <20080622133606.GA21828@endor.mknod.org> ``` Graham Wilson wrote: > On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 04:08:51PM +0200, Stefan Richter wrote: >> trying "git pull --no-commit . foo" for the first time, I was confused >> that --no-commit was a no-op when the pull resulted in a fast-forward. >> I.e. HEAD advanced the whole chain of commits to foo. I expected it to >> apply the diff of HEAD..foo but not commit them. > > --no-commit to me seems to mean don't commit a merge commit. Maybe what > you want is something like: > > git-diff HEAD foo | git-apply > Yes, I obviously got the wrong idea about git-pull --no-commit. git-diff + git-apply indeed accomplishes what I wanted to do. Thanks, -- Stefan Richter -=====-==--- -==- =-==- http://arcgraph.de/sr/ ```