All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com>
To: Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com>
Cc: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>,
	"Phillip Wood" <phillip.wood123@gmail.com>,
	"Git Mailing List" <git@vger.kernel.org>,
	"Ævar Arnfjörð" <avarab@gmail.com>,
	"Felipe Contreras" <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] pull: abort if --ff-only is given and fast-forwarding is impossible
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2021 13:37:45 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <CABPp-BGGi_b3PeFZ4-uErLS2vad-mX5gcuO+=nfgQreRMSCYZw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAMMLpeRX3iMwT9NJ+ULHgAhS3A=nAybgDYFHomkY3sif-H+F4g@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 11:20 AM Alex Henrie <alexhenrie24@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 11:51 AM Elijah Newren <newren@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 10:08 AM Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > Phillip Wood <phillip.wood123@gmail.com> writes:
> > >
> > > > Thanks for revising this patch, I like this approach much better. I do
> > > > however have some concerns about the interaction of pull.ff with the
> > > > rebase config and command line options. I'd naively expect the
> > > > following behavior (where rebase can fast-forward if possible)
> > > >
> > > >   pull.ff  pull.rebase  commandline  action
> > > >    only     not false                rebase
> > > >    only     not false   --no-rebase  fast-forward only
> > > >     *       not false    --ff-only   fast-forward only
> > > >    only     not false    --ff        merge --ff
> > > >    only     not false    --no-ff     merge --no-ff
> > > >    only       false                  fast-forward only
> > > >    only       false      --rebase    rebase
> > > >    only       false      --ff        merge --ff
> > > >    only       false      --no-ff     merge --no-ff
> > >
> > > Do you mean by "not false" something other than "true"?  Are you
> > > trying to capture what should happen when these configuration
> > > options are unspecified as well (and your "not false" is "either set
> > > to true or unspecified")?  I ask because the first row does not make
> > > any sense to me.  It seems to say
> > >
> > >     "If pull.ff is set to 'only', pull.rebase is not set to 'false',
> > >     and the command line does not say anything, we will rebase".
> >
> > I think Phillip is trying to answer what to do when pull.ff and
> > pull.rebase conflict.  If I read his "not false" means "is set to
> > something other than false", then I agree with his table, but I think
> > he missed covering some cases.
> >
> > I think his table says that pull.rebase=false cannot conflict with
> > pull.ff settings, but any other value for pull.rebase can.  That makes
> > sense to me.
> >
> > I'd similarly say that pull.ff=true cannot conflict with any
> > pull.rebase settings...but that both pull.ff=only AND pull.ff=false
> > conflict with pull.rebase={true,merges}.
> >
> > My opinion would be:
> >   * conflicting command line flags results in the last one winning.
> >   * --no-rebase makes pull.ff determine the action.
> >   * --ff makes pull.rebase determine the action.
> >   * any other command line flag (-r|--rebase|--no-ff|--ff-only)
> > overrides both pull.ff and pull.rebase
> >   * If no command line option is given, and pull.ff and pull.rebase
> > conflict, then error out.
> >
> > I believe my recommendation above is consistent with every entry in
> > Phillip's table except the first line (where I suggest erroring out
> > instead).
>
> I'm not sure that --no-ff should imply --no-rebase because `git
> rebase` actually has a --no-ff option to rewrite commits even when
> fast-forwarding is possible. And it's not really necessary to make
> --ff-only imply --no-rebase because we're going to make `git pull`
> handle --ff-only itself without invoking `git merge`. However, the
> rest of this proposal could be implemented in a straightforward manner
> by making --rebase on the command line imply --ff, and I think that
> would be a fine solution.

git rebase has a --no-ff but it doesn't do anything like what git
pull's --no-ff has long been documented to do.  git pull's --no-ff
very clearly states that a merge commit will be created, and thus is
tied to merging instead of rebasing.

Also, I don't think pull needs to provide a union of all merge and
rebase options; so there's no need to add a way to invoke a 'rebase
--no-ff' from pull.  (Folks can run individual fetch & merge or rebase
steps, after all.)  I think we should concentrate on making sure that
we provide reasonable behavior when conflicting options/command-lines
from the already provided set are specified.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2021-07-12 20:37 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2021-07-11  1:26 [PATCH] pull: abort if --ff-only is given and fast-forwarding is impossible Alex Henrie
2021-07-11 17:08 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-11 20:00   ` Alex Henrie
2021-07-11 21:41     ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-12 10:21 ` Phillip Wood
2021-07-12 16:04   ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-12 16:29   ` Alex Henrie
2021-07-12 17:43     ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-12 17:08   ` Junio C Hamano
2021-07-12 17:30     ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-12 17:50     ` Elijah Newren
2021-07-12 18:20       ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-12 18:20       ` Alex Henrie
2021-07-12 18:24         ` Alex Henrie
2021-07-12 19:55           ` Junio C Hamano
2021-07-12 20:19             ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-12 20:51             ` Elijah Newren
2021-07-12 23:00               ` Junio C Hamano
2021-07-12 23:05                 ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-12 23:24                 ` Elijah Newren
2021-07-12 20:37         ` Elijah Newren [this message]
2021-07-12 21:06           ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-12 17:54     ` Phillip Wood
2021-07-14  8:37 ` Son Luong Ngoc
2021-07-14 15:14   ` Felipe Contreras
2021-07-14 15:22   ` Elijah Newren
2021-07-14 17:19     ` Junio C Hamano
2021-07-14 17:31     ` Felipe Contreras

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to='CABPp-BGGi_b3PeFZ4-uErLS2vad-mX5gcuO+=nfgQreRMSCYZw@mail.gmail.com' \
    --to=newren@gmail.com \
    --cc=alexhenrie24@gmail.com \
    --cc=avarab@gmail.com \
    --cc=felipe.contreras@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=phillip.wood123@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.