On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 04:18:57PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > W. Trevor King wrote: > > On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 03:34:34PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > > W. Trevor King wrote: > > > > On Fri, May 02, 2014 at 02:13:25PM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > > > > It would matter almost exactly zero. > > > > > > > > Some folks have explicit merge policies, and deciding how much > > > > that matters is probably best left up to the projects themselves > > > > and not decided in Git code. > > > > > > Let's make some fake numbers to see around how much this would matter. > > > > The point isn't that this is a huge flaw, the point is that we should > > be able to configure Git to match sane workflows. > > The point is that we are tainting a discussion about how to improve the > defaults for the vast majority of users I've renamed this sub-thread (which started around $gmane/247835) to avoid potential confusion/dilution. > > The goal is to train them to do: > > > > > % git config --global pull.mode none > > > % git fetch > > > % git merge --no-ff Sticking to my 'no-ff' topic branch example, this should have been: git merge --no-ff remote branch I want folks to use --ff-only when pulling their default upstream. > > The 'git pull' (with 'none' mode) explainer just helps retrain folks > > that are already using the current 'git pull' incorrectly. > > If you are going to train them to use a configuration, it should be: > > % git config --global pull.ff false I don't want all pulls to be --no-ff, only pulls from topic branches. I think adding a prompt or making the integration a two-step fetch/merge are both ways to jog a user into consciously evaluating their actions. I don't see how a changing the default single-step pull strategy (whatever it is) will. I also don't look forward to explaining an adaptive strategy that tries to get my workflow right without command-line ff options to folks on their first day using Git. Cheers, Trevor -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy