From: "Björn Steinbrink" <B.Steinbrink@gmx.de>
To: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@iabervon.org>
Cc: Thomas Rast <trast@student.ethz.ch>, git@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] pull/fetch rename
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2009 05:06:08 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091021030608.GA18997@atjola.homenet> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LNX.2.00.0910201912390.14365@iabervon.org>
On 2009.10.20 19:56:01 -0400, Daniel Barkalow wrote:
> But I don't really know; are there IRC logs you can quote or reference
> with people making the mistake you're trying to help them avoid?
"git pull" is kind of a jack of all trades WRT user errors, so I'll just
pick up examples of all kinds, this might get long...
[If you read this and find out that you're quoted/referenced here: I
don't mean to blame or embarrass you, or to point out that you're stupid
or whatever. Quite contrary, I just want to show how git's pull UI _might_
be responsible for your mistakes. The comments I made are purely my,
possibly biased, reaction to what happened.]
That said, here we go:
1) Unexpected fast-forward even with --no-ff
"git pull --no-ff abc:abc" with "abc" being checked out.
As pull explicitly allows fetches into the checked out branch head, this
first fast-forwards abc, and updates the working tree/index. And then
the --no-ff merge is a no-op.
http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2009-10-20#l2080
(Should be a catchable special case, and the special --update-head-ok
handling of "git pull" is from times where git didn't have remote
tracking branches. I'd argue that that support should be dropped or at
least disabled when you're using the modern setup, might be kept for
oldtimers still using .git/remotes/*. Dunno...)
2) "git pull" taken as "reset --hard"
git checkout -b foo; git pull origin bar
The user actually just wanted to look at things and thus was ok with:
git fetch origin; git checkout origin/bar
http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2009-10-20#l1807
(user seemed to be so inclined to use "pull" that he initially didn't
even realize that he didn't want to merge when I asked whether that's
what he wants)
3) User expects "pull" to update all branch heads that have a configured
upstream
08:31 dimsuz hi guys! suppose i'm currently on master. then run git
fetch. which delivers updates to master and other
branches. I don't merge anything, but do checkout some
branch (which is not master). Question: will these new
updates get into this branch automatically after i check
it out? question2: will branch master contain those
updates when i ckeck it out later?
08:32 Circuitsoft dimsuz. After a fetch, no.
08:33 Circuitsoft However, if you pull, any branches that were set
up as local tracking branches will get updated.
08:33 Circuitsoft Otherwise, only remote tracking branches will be
updated.
http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2009-10-20#l969
(No idea about that one, have seen that once before, but it's definitely
not even remotely as common as the others)
4) User expects "pull" to create branches
07:25 fynn Hey, I just pulled a branch from remote, and I don't see
it in "git branch"
07:25 doener fynn: if you "pull" that means "fetch this and merge it
to what I have checked out"
07:25 fynn doener: hm, I just did "git pull" and it showed the new
branch
07:26 fynn but I don't see it in my branches...
07:26 fynn doener: should I create that branch as a tracking branch
first?
07:26 doener fynn: you're looking at "git branch -r" or "git branch
-a", right?
07:26 fynn doener: yeah, I'm seeing it in origin/foo, but not
local.
07:26 doener fynn: the "git fetch" should have created a remote
tracking branch, as usual, not a local branch head
(which would be shown by just "git branch")
07:27 fynn doener: OK, what should I do to create it locally then?
07:28 doener fynn: just the usual "git branch foo origin/foo", or to
checkout at the same time: "git checkout -b foo
origin/foo" or "git checkout -t origin/foo" (shortcut)
http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2009-10-19#l830
(Note how my "fetch this and merge it" is actually inaccurate for just
"git pull", there is no "this" and that case. I took "pulled a branch"
to mean that he did "git pull <remote> <branch>", which wouldn't have
created/update the remote tracking branch [or did patches for that go
in? I lost track...])
4b) User expects pull to create a branch head
09:58 araujo git pull origin <new_branch>
09:58 araujo will get me the new branch from repo right?
10:00 charon araujo: no, that will fetch *and merge* that branch
10:00 araujo charon, how to just pull?
http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2009-10-19#l1152
(Note how he asked "how to just pull?", even after being told that pull
isn't what he wants)
5) User possibly expecting "pull" to be able to act as "reset --hard"
21:01 aidan What do I do about this: html/config/core.php: needs
update
21:02 aidan git pull (gives that)
21:02 Ilari aidan: You have uncommitted changes to that file...
21:15 aidan Ilari: how can I just pull master and overwrite any
changes?
http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2009-10-18#l2130
(I'm not sure about that one, "overwrite any changes" might mean "drop
uncommitted changes and merge" or "just get me the remote's state,
dropping my commits and uncommitted changes". Most of the time I've seen
similar requests, the user wanted the latter).
6) User says "pull" but probably means "fetch"
14:08 Alien_Freak once I have a clone of a repo I know you can do
a checkout tag but is there anyway to pull just
the tag?
http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2009-10-16#l1664
(There was no answer, thus it's hard to tell, but I guess he wanted
something like:
git init; git fetch --no-tags url tag <tag>; git checkout <tag>
At least I'm quite sure he didn't mean "pull" as in "git pull")
7) User expecting "pull" to just do fast-forwards (or so)
13:18 ohadlevy I'm getting a merge commit message after each
time i do git pull, i didnt have it before,
where should I look?
13:20 charon ohadlevy: pull merges; you may just have hit lucky so
far, and always had a fast-forward merge
13:20 ohadlevy charon: any way I could avoid these commits?
just rebasing? its a pure RO repo
http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2009-10-16#l1579
(Apparently, user was tricked by the fast-forward behaviour he
experienced earlier. I don't see any solution to this, except for
defaulting to fast-forward-only and requiring a --merge flag (which
might imply --no-ff), but I'm likely influenced by the "git update"
stuff here)
8) "reset --hard" again
20:10 roger_padactor i commited then did a pull how do i get back to
my commit. the pull over wrote the files
20:11 merlin83 roger_padactor: you can't, pull == fetch + hard
reset to latest commit
http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2009-10-14#l2306
(Someone being told that pull is fetch + reset --hard is actually new to
me. Only saw that as an expectation previously.)
9) More "git pull <remote> A:A"
19:10 _hp_ another question, how do I add the remote branch to
track so I don't have to constantly do git pull origin
masterA:masterA ?
19:11 Ilari _hp_: Don't use that src:dest with pull!
(discussion died)
http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2009-10-12#l2427
10) "pull" mistaken for "cvs update"
07:25 Avrem how do I use "git pull" to do something like what "cvs
update" does ?
07:25 Avrem which is, replaces files I've deleted
07:25 Avrem from that from the central repository
07:30 omega I'm not sure, but can't you git checkout <deleted files>
to get them back?
http://colabti.de/irclogger/irclogger_log/git?date=2009-10-11#l545
(This adds a new twist to the "scm update" stuff, although svn/hg don't
seem to have "restore individual files" in their "update" command, so
this might be cvs-only. But it's so long since I used cvs, I don't even
know whether this is correct. But it somehow got me thinking about how
"update" is actually also "downgrade" in svn/hg, something git does via
"checkout" [which happens to make more sense to me]. And I think it
shows how "git pull" is taken to mean "update", even when ignoring the
special behaviour described here. It's not taken to mean "merge this",
but just "update to upstream").
So that's ten days of #git. I left out a bunch of duplications (most
were "pull == fetch", "pull == update" and "pull to update
non-checked-out branch").
Björn
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-10-21 3:06 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 32+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-10-20 17:47 [RFC] pull/fetch rename Thomas Rast
2009-10-20 19:59 ` Wesley J. Landaker
2009-10-20 21:46 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-10-20 22:53 ` Thomas Rast
2009-10-20 23:11 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-10-21 2:01 ` Wesley J. Landaker
2009-10-20 23:16 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-10-20 21:42 ` Nanako Shiraishi
2009-10-20 22:41 ` Thomas Rast
2009-10-20 23:56 ` Daniel Barkalow
2009-10-21 3:06 ` Björn Steinbrink [this message]
2009-10-21 4:22 ` Daniel Barkalow
2009-10-21 11:57 ` Björn Steinbrink
2009-10-21 17:12 ` Daniel Barkalow
2009-10-21 6:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-10-21 17:19 ` Clemens Buchacher
2009-10-21 17:21 ` [PATCH] modernize fetch/merge/pull examples Clemens Buchacher
2009-10-21 21:38 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-10-21 21:41 ` [RFC/PATCH] git-merge: forbid fast-forward and up-to-date when --no-commit is given Junio C Hamano
2009-10-22 10:21 ` Nanako Shiraishi
2009-10-22 22:26 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-10-21 21:46 ` [PATCH] git-merge: imply --no-ff " Junio C Hamano
2009-10-22 6:35 ` Clemens Buchacher
2009-10-22 8:51 ` [PATCH] modernize fetch/merge/pull examples Thomas Rast
2009-10-22 9:48 ` [RFC] pull/fetch rename Thomas Rast
2009-10-21 6:30 ` Mike Hommey
2009-10-21 6:33 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-10-21 7:06 ` Mike Hommey
2009-10-21 7:22 ` Junio C Hamano
2009-10-21 7:45 ` Jeff King
2009-10-21 7:47 ` Jeff King
2009-10-24 6:30 ` Junio C Hamano
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=20091021030608.GA18997@atjola.homenet \
--to=b.steinbrink@gmx.de \
--cc=barkalow@iabervon.org \
--cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=trast@student.ethz.ch \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).