All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Git merge default?
@ 2008-09-08 18:03 Gareth Adams
  0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Gareth Adams @ 2008-09-08 18:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: git

Sorry that this is cross posted to git-users but I didn't realise how low
traffic that list was.

Why doesn't `git merge` default to the tracked branch in the same way
e.g. `git push` does?

Often I find myself performing a pull, and when I switch branch I'm
told that "Your branch is behind the tracked remote branch 'origin/
master' by 12 commits". However, despite git knowing where my branch
is based and how far away it is, I still have to specify `git merge
origin/master` to perform the merge.

It's been pointed out that another `git pull` will usually have the
same effect, but it seems that this introduces a redundant fetch, and
to be honest I couldn't work out whether the pull would fail if the
remote repo was unavailable for any reason.

Obviously this is a really minor point, and it doesn't exactly affect
my working day for more than a few seconds, but I was curious what I
was missing that such a complete package as git had this little
internal inconsistency.

TIA,
Gareth

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] only message in thread

only message in thread, other threads:[~2008-09-08 18:06 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-09-08 18:03 Git merge default? Gareth Adams

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.